Wireless

The Federal Communications Commission is taking on difficult and controversial issues as it works toward developing a comprehensive national broadband plan.

On Wednesday the agency heard from an FCC task force on the progress that it's making in writing that broadband plan, which will be presented to Congress in February.

The FCC has been tasked with developing a plan that will get broadband services to all Americans. In working to come up with a comprehensive policy, the FCC has tackled several controversial issues, most notably reforming the Universal Service Fund, reallocating wireless spectrum, and forcing more competition in the market for cable set-top boxes.

One of the top items on the FCC task force's to-do list is reforming the $7 billion rural phone subsidy program called the Universal Service Fund. This program, which also provides funding for schools and libraries through its E-rate program, is funded by consumers, who are charged extra fees on their long-distance phone bills. Specifically, the agency wants to expand the program to help fund broadband service in parts of the country where private industry doesn't find it profitable to invest.

The task force didn't provide long-term recommendations for transitioning USF into funding broadband deployments. But in the short term, it suggested extending some current programs such as life-line link-up to schools and other public areas to provide more access to unemployed people who may not have Internet connectivity at home. The idea is that these individuals can use broadband in these public areas to look for jobs.

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said it will take time to get reforms in place. He noted that the national broadband plan won't directly affect USF, but he said the program, once it's expanded, will eventually help fund and become a key part of helping get broadband to underserved parts of the country.

"It's tempting to kick the can [USF reform} further down the road," he said. "But for many reasons it's important to begin tackling these issues now. We must make sure that the fund fully supports the technology of today and tomorrow, not just the technology of the past."

But the process is going to be a long one, he said. And he wouldn't comment on whether true reform could be achieved in his term as chairman.

The FCC task force also reiterated its plans to re-evaluate spectrum issues. Genachowski has said publicly that one of his top priorities is reallocating and finding more spectrum that can be used to build wireless broadband services. Both he and the CTIA, a trade group representing the wireless industry, say there is a looming spectrum crisis that could result in dire consequences without adequate attention now.

During its report to the commission, the broadband task force said it is working with Congress to inventory and assess current spectrum usage in the U.S. It is calling for Congress to also require periodic review of spectrum uses and to find ways to clear spectrum bands that aren't serving other uses, such as wireless broadband.

The task force also said during its presentation Wednesday that it's looking at ways to spur more competition in the cable set-top box market. The group said that a lack of competition in the set-top box market has also resulted in a lack of innovation. The agency feels that more competition in this market would spur companies to develop new Internet applications and services that could be accessed via TVs.

The FCC is considering requiring paid TV providers, such as Comcast, Time Warner Cable, AT&T, and Verizon Communications to supply a low-cost network interface device that would allow people to access the Internet on their TVs and to access cable TV without using a cable box.

The Federal Communications Commission is shaking up the communications market with bold initiatives to overhaul the $7 billion Universal Service Fund to help pay for universal broadband and reallocate wireless spectrum for new wireless broadband services.

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski presented plans for revising the USF program and reallocating spectrum during a speech on Tuesday in Washington, D.C., at The Innovation Economy Conference.

Julius Genachowski, FCC chairman

The Universal Service Fund is a $7 billion federal subsidy program that is funded by fees added to consumer phone bills. The USF was originally designed to provide subsidies to pay for phone service in rural communities and to low-income residents. But the FCC believes that the fund should also be used to help pay for universal broadband, a policy priority for President Obama's administration.

Revamping the fund has been controversial, as some rural phone companies have resisted any attempts at expanding the scope of the program. Genachowski acknowledged that making changes wouldn't be easy, according to a transcript of his prepared speech.

"This is a thorny issue, with no shortage of practical and statutory challenges," he said. "(But) we need to wring savings out of the system, protect consumers, avoid flash cuts, while ultimately moving USF in the direction it needs to go to support our 21st century platform for innovation."

Genachowski emphasized that reallocating some of these funds to help build broadband infrastructure in rural areas is important for spurring innovation.

"USF is a multibillion-dollar annual fund that continues to support yesterday's communications infrastructure," he said. "The goal of universality is as important as ever--and to meet our country's innovation goals, we need to reorient the fund to support broadband communications."

Genachowski also reiterated the importance of auctioning off more wireless spectrum to be used for mobile broadband services. He called wireless spectrum the "lifeblood of our wireless networks." And he said they are a critical part of innovation and infrastructure.

The FCC has already increased the amount of spectrum available to wireless companies threefold in the past few years, Genachowski, noting that experts believe that there will be a 30-fold increase in traffic on these networks. And without more spectrum, these networks will be congested and will stifle innovation.

"Given that spectrum can take many years to reallocate and build out, if we don't start the process now, we'll pay a steep price in innovation down the road," he said.

As part of his proposal, he says the FCC will encourage more efficient use of spectrum and devices through innovative spectrum policies. He noted that the FCC will also look at increasing spectrum flexibility and opening secondary markets for licensed spectrum use. And he said the agency will look into allowing more use of unlicensed spectrum, such as the "white space" spectrum that sits between broadcast channels.

But the most controversial proposal he has put forth involves taking away spectrum from current spectrum license holders, such as TV broadcasters, and reallocating those licenses to broadband wireless providers through another auction process.

"In order to support the full flowering of innovation, and to keep the U.S. globally competitive, we will need to find ways to free up new spectrum to mobile broadband," he said, according to the transcript of his speech. "This will require examining old allocation decisions--often decades-old--and evaluating them against current technologies and consumer demand."

TV broadcasters have vehemently resisted this proposal.

Broadcast airwaves are considered very valuable because they can travel long distances and penetrate walls. The most recent 700MHz spectrum auction, which auctioned off analog TV spectrum, is being used by operators such as Verizon Wireless to build 4G wireless broadband services. And Genachowski believes that more spectrum should be freed up to allow for more 4G wireless broadband services.

There's been a lot of talk in 2009 about the next generation of wireless technology, known as 4G wireless broadband, but the current generation of 3G wireless technology is far from dead.

For many wireless operators, especially those that have built their networks using the global standard GSM, the current 3G wireless technology called HSPA still has some legs left. And while many carriers are planning their 4G networks, hundreds of wireless providers throughout the world are also expected to upgrade existing network infrastructure with the latest versions of the 3G wireless technology to increase speeds and offer new services. And because these network speeds will match current 4G speeds, consumers will likely see no difference in capability.

For this reason, the next few years will likely continue to be all about 3G technology. And 4G services, where they will be available, will likely appeal only to niche audiences.

"The average consumer doesn't care about peak data rates or network acronyms," said Dan Warren, the GSM Association's director of technology. "They just care about the experience. They want to be able to watch YouTube or get live traffic updates on their smartphones. And they don't care whether it's a new network or a current network that is being upgraded."

Mobile operators around the world are seeing a huge growth in the amount of mobile data traffic across their networks. This trend is expected to continue as more consumers buy smartphone and jump onto the mobile Web. By 2014, mobile devices are expected to send and receive more data in one month than in all of 2008.

Three-quarters of this traffic will be attributed to Internet access, while nearly all the rest will be due to music and video streaming, the GSM Association recently said. The new usage patterns will put strains on carrier networks, and operators are planning now to keep up with demand. Already, AT&T, which is the exclusive carrier for the iPhone in the U.S., is struggling to keep up with the heavy data usage.

While 4G networks will certainly increase network speeds and capacity, these networks and the devices that can be used on these networks will not be built overnight. This is why many carriers who are looking to meet demands today are turning toward advanced 3G upgrades.

T-Mobile USA, the smallest of the major U.S. wireless operators, has adopted this strategy. The company is currently upgrading its existing HSPA network, which launched just last year, to HSPA Plus, the most advanced 3G technology available. It has already started testing the new service in Philadelphia. And the company expects to deploy the lion's share of its upgrade across its entire footprint in 2010.

Meanwhile other operators, such as Verizon Wireless and Sprint Nextel are looking toward 4G technologies.

To the 4th power: WiMax vs. LTE
Two technologies dominate the 4G landscape: WiMax and LTE. In the WiMax corner is a company called Clearwire, which is backed by Sprint and Intel, as well as the nation's biggest cable operators, Comcast and Time Warner Cable. The company is currently building its network and has 13 cities up and running with service.

In the LTE corner is the rest of the wireless industry, including at least 50 mobile operators worldwide that have already committed to LTE plans, trials or deployments. The first LTE networks, including one being built by Verizon Wireless here in the U.S., are expected to be rolled out next year. NTT DoComo of Japan and TeliaSonera of Sweden have also committed to deploying LTE next year. That said, major network expansions aren't expected until at least 2011.

One of the problems that 4G carriers will face is that initially their networks will be islands of service. And it will take years for operators to blanket the country with their services. For example, Clearwire has mostly deployed its service in cities, such as Baltimore, Philadelphia, and Chicago. Verizon will likely do the same thing with its LTE network. And then the networks will spread from there. Verizon expects to launch 25 to 30 with 4G service in 2010.

Another problem 4G operators face is a dearth of new devices. Clearwire's WiMax service has been available for more than a year in some cities, and it still only offers USB modems, PC cards, subscriber modems and WiMax-enabled laptops. So far no one has started selling mobile devices, such as WiMax embedded phones. In fact, in January Nokia, one of the initial eco-system backers of WiMax, canceled its N810 WiMax Edition tablet. More devices aren't likely to be developed until the network is more extensive. Sprint is offering a dual-mode service that allows laptop users to switch between its 3G mobile broadband service and the 4G WiMax service, where it's available. But the service is only available for laptops.

As for LTE, no devices exist today because no LTE network exists. Since most of the world's wireless operators will likely use LTE for their next-generation networks, it's a fair bet that there will eventually be a plethora of LTE devices. And carriers, such as Verizon, will likely embed dual-mode chips that work with 3G networks, too. But given the fact that new wireless technology first shows up in laptops and then moves to phones, it's unlikely that consumers will see any LTE-enabled mobile devices for at least another 18 months to two years. And after that, it could take many more months to fill the pipeline.

Meanwhile, there are already 1,600 HSPA-enabled devices on the market, including smartphones, Netbooks, and laptops, according to the GSM Association. There are currently 321 HSPA networks across 120 countries worldwide, and 285 of these networks are commercially live, supporting more than 167.5 million connections.

And while Clearwire reported it added 173,000 new WiMax subscribers in the third quarter of 2009, the GSMA reports that more than 9 million new HSPA connections are added globally every month, with about 1.3 million of these connections coming from the U.S.

The need for speed
Of course, it's true that current 3G technology is considerably slower than 4G networks. Today's 3G technology, whether it is HSPA or EV-DO, offers typical download speeds of between 400 Kbps to 700Kbps. But the latest version of HSPA, called HSPA Plus, offers average download speeds between 4 Mbps and 6 Mbps. This is the same download speed range that Clearwire's WiMax service offers today.

It's difficult to compare these speeds with LTE, since there are no commercial deployments of LTE. But some experts say average speeds for LTE will initially exceed the 4Mbps range. Some people are expecting the service to offer average speeds around 15 Mbps to 20 Mbps.

Because there is little difference between WiMax and HSPA Plus in terms of speed, many operators are opting to invest in upgrading their networks to this technology while they plan for their eventual LTE migration. The GSMA says there are now 56 networks globally deploying HSPA Plus. And 28 of those networks are now live.

T-Mobile USA, as mentioned earlier, is one of them. AT&T initially indicated it was looking into HSPA Plus, but the company has more recently backed away from those claims. Instead, the company has said it is upgrading to a different version of HSPA called HSPA 7.2. AT&T's chief technology officer, John Donovan, said at the CTIA Wireless trade show last month that AT&T will start its LTE upgrade in 2011.

Mark Siegel, a spokesman for the company, said AT&T is keeping its options open.

"We are trying to stay flexible in how we increase 3G speeds as we transition to LTE," he said in an e-mail.

This means that T-Mobile is likely to be the first major U.S. carrier to compete against Clearwire's WiMax service.

T-Mobile has been criticized for entering the 3G market in the U.S. late, but the company has been working aggressively to catch up. At the beginning of 2009, T-Mobile could reach about 100 million people with its 3G wireless service. By the end of the year more 200 million people will have access to its network, according to Neville Ray, senior vice president of engineering operations for T-Mobile.

By contrast, Clearwire's WiMax service currently reaches about 30 million U.S. residents. And the company plans to reach about 120 million by the end of 2010.

As for subscribers, Clearwire said that at the end of the third quarter of 2009 it had about 555,000 subscribers, which includes people who have subscribed to the service via its partners Sprint, Comcast, and Time Warner, which are reselling the service. T-Mobile finished the third quarter with a total of 33.4 million customers.

"We have been rapidly expanding the reach of our network over the past 12 to 18 months," Ray said. "And in 2010 we are looking to jump ahead with a leading 3G experience. The only thing that will come close are data sticks from Clearwire. And their service is limited geographically."

Ray said the HSPA-Plus strategy allows T-Mobile to better compete against AT&T and Verizon, because it allows T-Mobile to stretch its 3G investment while still offering faster and more ubiquitous coverage for consumers.

"We may have been a little late to the 3G dance," Ray added. "But clearly the mobile data explosion is rapidly growing today. And our plan for 2010 will put us in a leading position to handle these demands."

T-Mobile USA hasn't said for certain that it will use LTE when it eventually builds a 4G wireless network. But considering that its parent company in Europe, T-Mobile, has committed to using the technology, it's a safe bet the U.S. affiliate will as well.

Ray said for now it's better for T-Mobile to leverage HSPA's existing device ecosystem. The company is already offering several devices, such as the Motorola Cliq, the HTC myTouch, and the Samsung Behold that are equipped with the faster HSPA 7.2 technology. And he said that T-Mobile expects to have HSPA Plus handsets on the market in 2010.

"Because there are a large number of operators throughout the world upgrading to HSPA Plus, it's already on the device roadmaps," he said. "This means we can bring the advanced 3G experience to consumers in mobile devices in 2010. And that is not the case with either LTE or WiMax."

The next generation of wireless may be on its way, but it's a slow road. In the meantime, consumers will likely get more out of faster 3G networks, such as T-Mobile's network than the budding services from Clearwire or Verizon Wireless. It will certainly be a fun horse race to follow.

AT&T launched a prepaid wireless broadband service on Monday, following the lead of competitor Verizon Wireless.

Pricing for the new AT&T DataConnect Pass plans are the same as what Verizon Wireless is charging. Customers can pay $15 for a daily pass with a data usage cap of 75 megabytes. A weekly plan costs $30 and allows for 250MB of data usage. And the monthly plan is $50 and offers 500MB of usage.

While AT&T and Verizon Wireless have offered prepaid cell phone service for years, up until now the companies have required customers sign a contract for their wireless broadband services. Wireless broadband services allow users to connect their laptops to the Internet via the carriers 3G wireless network. These services have mostly been targeted at business users.

As these big phone companies move mobile broadband services into the mainstream, they are expanding their payment options to attract more consumers. But for many consumers in this tough economic environment, taking on a new contract and monthly service fee is simply too much. As such, the prepaid model is now moving to these services as well.

Prepaid niche players, such as Leap Wireless and Virgin Mobile, have recognized the demand for prepaid wireless broadband services, and they are already selling services to address the market. Leap Wireless offers an unlimited usage plan for $40 a month. And Virgin Mobile, which is now owned by Sprint, offers a $60 plan that has a usage cap of 1 gigabyte for a month.

Will these new prepaid offerings be enough to entice consumers to sign up for 3G wireless broadband service? That's a question yet to be answered. But AT&T, especially, should be careful what it wishes for. The company's 3G wireless network is already overburdened with iPhone users' heavy wireless data usage.

It's a simple principle of economics: competition and more customer choice results in lower prices.

And so it is true of broadband services. With about 65 percent of the U.S. population now subscribing to broadband, cable operators and telephone companies are duking it out for new customers. The companies are offering cut-throat prices and new promotions to win over new subscribers.

For consumers in areas of the country where competition is heating up, the savings can be huge. For example, Verizon Communications, which has been losing DSL customers to competitors, this week announced aggressive new promotional deals for its high-speed DSL and Fios, fiber-to-the-home Internet services, as it tries to tempt new subscribers.

New Verizon DSL customers can get six months of free Internet service if they commit to a one-year contract. The company also announced a slew of deals for Fios customers, including one that offers new Fios TV subscribers who sign up for service as part of a bundle, free multiroom DVR capability for three months.

These deals sound terrific to consumers, like me, who live in markets with at least two broadband competitors. But for millions of Americans living in rural regions of the country and for people living in some urban areas, where carriers don't find it profitable to offer service, only one choice of Internet provider exists today.

And as a general rule of thumb, these consumers aren't usually offered enticing promotional deals or discounts on service. In fact, on average they pay much more for their services than people living in more competitive markets.

A task force at the Federal Communications Commission that is developing a national broadband policy highlighted this fact as a major barrier to universal broadband access during an open meeting at the commission on Wednesday.

The group also noted that broadband service providers tend to deploy service in higher income neighborhoods where more people are likely to sign up for service over low-income areas. As a result these markets generally have only one provider. What this means is that lower-income people, who have less disposable income, are often the ones forced to pay higher prices, while people who have more money pay lower prices for service.

Big savings in the Big Apple
To test this concept and to see if I could significantly put a dent in my monthly expenses, I decided to investigate my own broadband options in New York City, where I have lived and been a cable subscriber for nearly 12 years. With a little bit of leg work, I quickly discovered, I could save nearly $700 in one year by switching broadband providers.

I currently pay about $147 a month for cable TV and broadband service from Time Warner Cable. This bill does include two DVRs, two remote controls, and HBO channels and on-demand services. But it does not include taxes or a home phone service.

I live on the Upper West Side of Manhattan and even though I have seen Verizon putting fiber underneath the street on my block and even though my inside sources at the company have told me that two central offices near my neighborhood are currently being upgraded this month to provide Fios TV service, I am still not yet eligible for Fios service.

The only option I have from Verizon right now is DSL service. With the new six-month broadband-for-free promotion, Verizon is offering a triple play package that includes 3 Mbps or 7.1 Mbps DSL, DirecTV Plus DVR package, and Verizon's unlimited local and long-distance calling plan for $70 per month for the first six months.

During the second six months of this annual plan, the bundle with up-to-3 Mbps service is $99.99 per month. And for the faster 7.1 Mbps broadband service, the price is $109.99 per month after the first six months.

Factoring in the first six months of free DSL service in this total package, my average monthly cost would be $90 per month for home phone, broadband, and subscription TV services. This is an average savings of $57 per month over my current service, and a yearly savings of about $684.

I called Time Warner Cable to see if the company could beat Verizon's price. The best price offered to me for the same exact package, which includes one set-top box with DVR service, was $119 per month before taxes. The only difference in this package is that I would not have to sign a contract, but the price would be guaranteed for a year. The representative I talked with on the phone offered to give me free Showtime service for a year to sweeten the deal. Even at this price, Verizon's offer is still $29 a month cheaper than Time Warner's revised service. In total, I would still be saving $348 for the year.

But there is one catch to Verizon's deal. Verizon guarantees the price of the bundle for a year. And if customers cancel the service during that time period there is an early termination fee. But DirecTV requires users sign a two-year contract. And pricing on the TV service is not guaranteed during the second year, which means it could go up significantly in 2011.

What's more, if Fios becomes available in my building, I can upgrade my Internet and phone services at no penalty. And I would be eligible for whatever special deal Verizon might offer me. But I would have to pay a penalty to DirecTV if I terminate my TV service early to get Fios TV.

Still, with a yearly savings of almost $400 to $700 sitting on the table, I'd be a fool not to make some kind of change now. But just imagine if there was a third or even a fourth competitor in my market? The savings could be even greater.

More competitors lead to lower prices
According to a Pew Internet and American Life Project study released in June, the more competitors there are in a market, the cheaper the price of the service for consumers. In the survey, about 21 percent of high-speed Internet users said they had only one choice in broadband provider. And on average these customers spend about $44.70 a month on high-speed Internet service. About 69 percent of respondents said they had two choices in broadband providers, and on average they spent about $38.30 on Internet per month. Average prices fell yet again for the 17 percent of respondents who said they had four or more broadband provider choices. The average amount they paid for service was about $32.10 per month.

What this tells us is that more choices matter. And when broadband service providers are forced to compete, consumers get better deals.

This basic thesis was also the conclusion of a recent study (PDF) commissioned by the FCC and conducted by Harvard University's Berkman Center for Internet & Society. This study concluded that that other countries have faster and cheaper Internet access because there is more competition. The report went on to conclude that this new competition was made possible by regulatory policy that promoted open-access rules or rules that force service providers to share their infrastructure with competitors.

"The lowest prices and highest speeds are almost all offered by firms in markets where, in addition to an incumbent telephone company and cable company, there are also competitors who entered the market, and built their presence, through use of open access facilities, " the report says.

The report has gotten plenty of criticism. AT&T and the National Cable & Telecommunications Association have filed letters warning the FCC against applying the findings to its national broadband policy. The NCTA said the FCC should be careful in accepting these results when past attempts here in the U.S. to impose open access rules have failed.

Whether open access rules really create more competition is debatable. But one thing that cannot be debated is the effect that more competitors have on prices and the quality of service in the overall market.

With this in mind, I hope that the FCC's new national broadband policy, when it's finally presented to Congress in February, will do more than simply ensure everyone in the U.S. has access to at least one broadband provider. I hope the plan also includes aggressive measures to encourage competition among two or more companies in as many markets as possible.

The Federal Communications Commission met Wednesday to discuss obstacles to enacting a national broadband policy that will provide high-speed Internet access to every American.

President Obama has made universal broadband access a key goal. Grants and loans for helping make universal broadband access a reality have already started being doled out as part of Congress' economic stimulus package.

In an effort to ensure that new programs and policies work toward achieving the same goal, the FCC has been tasked with developing a national broadband plan to help direct policy makers in getting affordable broadband to every American. A task force, headed by Blair Levin, who had been chief of staff for former FCC chairman Reed Hundt, is developing the plan that will be presented to Congress on February 17, 2010.

Levin and his staff appeared before the FCC Wednesday to present what they see as gaps or obstacles that must be overcome to develop clear recommendations and policy for universal broadband.

Levin said that commissioners and policy makers must consider the broadband ecosystem if they hope to achieve the president's goals. This means taking into account not only consumer needs but also considering the needs of the industry, which will likely fund the bulk of the $20 billion to $350 billion that will be needed to build new infrastructure and develop new programs for spreading broadband throughout the country.

In considering these needs, Levin said it is important to identify and come up with ways to overcome some hurdles that stand in the way for achieving the ultimate goal of providing broadband to every American.

Obstacles to universal broadband access
One major issue has to do with the Universal Service Fund, a program funded through extra charges on consumers' phone bills. The USF was originally designed to provide subsidies to pay for phone service in rural communities. But the task force believes that more of the $7 billion that is allocated each year from the fund should also be used to help subsidize the cost of deploying broadband in rural areas.

Today, most of these funds are used for voice services and not broadband, the task force reported. And of the money that is used to subsidize broadband, the group noted it is often used inefficiently so that gaps in broadband deployment are still not filled.

The task force also reported that there is still a high level of disparity in income levels between people who subscribe to broadband service and those who do not. Nearly 90 percent of families with incomes of $100,000 or more subscribe to broadband services, compared to 35 percent with incomes of $20,000 or less. Rural households are less likely to subscribe to broadband service than urban households. About 65 percent of white households subscribe to broadband, while only 40 percent of Hispanic households subscribe to broadband and 46 percent of African-American households have broadband.

Another issue that was brought up by the task force during the meeting is the fact that broadband service providers tend to favor higher-income regions in more populated areas over low-income areas.

The data suggests that many low-income people in these parts of the country are offered only one broadband service option. The data also suggests that these consumers who have only one option tend to pay higher prices for service.

What this means is that lower-income people, who have less disposable income, are often the ones forced to pay higher prices, while people who have more money pay lower prices for service.

Deployments in rural areas are often affected by the high cost of building infrastructure and providing service. The task force noted that "middle mile" costs are almost three times higher than general network operations costs. This high cost is often a serious barrier to rural broadband deployments, the group said.

Blair Levin, head of the task force developing a national broadband policy for the FCC.

This "middle mile" infrastructure consists of equipment and fiber that connects local cable head-ends or telephone company central offices with bigger points of presence that connect those networks to nationwide networks. The task force said there was a lack of efficient coordination when carriers or other utility providers dig trenches for fiber infrastructure. The group also noted that these deployment gaps don't only affect rural consumers, but many residential neighborhoods and small business marketplaces as well.

As the Internet and television markets converge, the task force also noted that a lack of innovation exists in the TV set-top box market. Specifically, the majority of consumers today use set-top boxes provided through their subscription TV providers. And only a very small number of devices are even available to purchase at retail. By comparison, there are hundreds of devices available in the mobile phone market. Due to a lack of competition, innovation has been stifled. And the task force recommends the FCC adopt policies to encourage a retail market for such devices.

That said, the FCC has tried to encourage the consumer electronics industry to develop set-top boxes that could be bought separately from cable services, but so far the efforts have largely failed.

More spectrum needed
On the wireless side, the key barrier is a lack of spectrum, the task force said. The problem is simple, as demand for mobile broadband increases, there is a need for more spectrum to support these services. Demand for these services comes from the rapidly growing market for smartphone wireless devices and Netbooks. By 2011, smartphone sales are expected to overtake standard mobile phones.

The task force said it is critical for the FCC to identify and reallocate available spectrum as soon as possible. The group said the nation could face a spectrum shortage as soon as 2013 or 2015, if nothing is done today.

The wireless trade group CTIA and the Consumer Electronics Association support this claim. And the groups sent a letter to FCC chairman Julius Genachowski on Tuesday urging him to investigate using broadcast TV spectrum for mobile Internet use.

The measure is opposed by the broadcast TV industry. But the FCC task force noted that as the need for wireless broadband spectrum increases, the need for broadcast TV spectrum is actually decreasing. Specifically, smartphone subscriptions have increased by 690 percent since 1998, while over-the-air TV viewership decreased by 56 percent. This proposal is already generating criticism from lawmakers supporting the TV broadcast industry.

Levin and his staff acknowledged there are many other barriers that exist in providing affordable broadband access to every person in the U.S. Levin said his staff is on track to meet its February deadline, but he said the process will remain open throughout the remaining 90 days that are left to incorporate new ideas. He also emphasized the fact that the ultimate success or failure of the national broadband plan will be in the hands of Congress and policy makers who must remain committed to implementing the plan.

"In my experience and seeing what has worked in other countries, you can plan all you want, but there really needs to be a long-term commitment for such plans to succeed," he said.

Also as part of the meeting, the five-member FCC unanimously voted to impose a "shot clock" for wireless tower applications to speed up the time it takes for wireless operators to deploy new cell phone networks.

Chairman Genachowski promised last month at the CTIA tradeshow in San Diego that the Commission would do what it could to speed up this process. And the Commission's vote solidified that promise.

"Tower siting is a vital piece of our industry," CTIA president and CEO Steve Largent said in a statement. "It enables mobile services, including voice and broadband, for consumers, public safety, and businesses. Both Congress and the Supreme Court recognized the importance of taking concrete steps to ensure that the zoning process does not become a barrier to the reasonable deployment of, and competition among, diverse wireless networks."

Acer Aspire One

(Credit: AT&T)

AT&T is hoping for happy holidays with the launch of two new Netbooks offering Windows 7 and mobile broadband.

The company announced Monday its new Netbook lineup--the Samsung Go and Acer Aspire One--both with built-in access to its 3G network. Available later this month in stores and online, both portables will cost gift buyers $199 after a mail-in rebate and two-year data plan contract.

The required DataConnect plan will offer 200MB of data for a new lower price of $35 per month, or 5GB for $60 per month, said AT&T. The plan will let consumers hop online via AT&T's 3G mobile network or any of the company's 20,000 Wi-Fi hot spots across the U.S.

"Demand for Netbooks remains strong among consumers, small business customers, and those who desire constant access to the Internet while on the go," said David Haight, vice president of product development for AT&T emerging devices, in a statement. "Paired with the nation's fastest 3G network, AT&T Wi-Fi service, and now the value and ease of use of Windows 7, these devices will make very attractive and affordable gifts this holiday season."

Samsung Go

(Credit: CNET)

Weighing less than three pounds, the Samsung Go is equipped with a 10-inch screen, 160GB hard drive, 1 GB of RAM, and a 1.3 megapixel Webcam. A bit skinnier at 2.2 pounds, the Acer Aspire One also includes a 10-inch screen, 160GB hard drive, 1GB of RAM, and built-in Webcam.

Both Netbooks also come with AT&T's Communication Manager software, which tries to help Internet users better manage their connections by automatically tapping into AT&T hot spots.

The Samsung and Acer machines have one potential limitation, however. Like most Netbooks, they come with Windows 7 Starter Edition, a stripped down version of Windows 7 that lacks certain key features of its beefier brethren.

Verizon Wireless on Thursday said it will offer customers who want Internet access on-the-go a prepaid wireless broadband option for their laptops.

The new services will be bundled with the Verizon Wireless USB760. They will operate on laptops running Windows, Mac, and Linux operating systems. The modem will be sold at Verizon Wireless Communications stores and at Best Buy locations beginning November 16.

Here's a breakdown of the new service plans and what users can expect to do with the limits that Verizon is offering.

The daily plan costs $15 and allows users to access 75 megabytes of data. This would allow users to send or receive about 25,600 e-mails, download 500 Web pages, and send and receive 150 low-resolution digital phones.

The weekly plan costs $30 and allows for 250 MB of data. This plan would allow users to send or receive about 85,300 e-mails, look up 1,700 Web pages, or send or receive about 500 low resolution digital photos.

And finally, the monthly plan costs $50 for 500 MB of data usage. And Verizon claims this is enough capacity to allow users to send or receive 170,000 e-mails, look up 3,400 Web pages, and send or receive 1,000 low-resolution digital photos.

Verizon's contract wireless broadband service costs $60 a month and allows users to transmit up to 5 gigabytes worth of data. It also offers a $40 a month plan that offers 250MB of data per month.

I've been thinking about buying a new gizmo, and it turns out I'm not the only one in the family having these thoughts.

My sister sent me an e-mail over the weekend:

I need a 3G card for my laptop and I'm going to get it from Verizon. What should I ask for? I just don't want them to try to sell me more or less than I need.

Coincidentally, I've been looking into the latest options for mobile broadband access for a couple of months now, ever since the two-year contract ran out on the Option GT Max 3.6 Express I bought in 2007.

Here's an expanded version of my reply e-mail:

There are four basic kinds of 3G wireless modems: USB dongles, PC Card and ExpressCard devices, portable 3G/Wi-Fi access points, and cell phones with wireless "tethering."

USB modems are the most popular type and usually the least expensive. They plug in like a thumb drive, and they're easy to deal with. But I don't like them because they can stick out pretty far, which makes them awkward and a bit fragile. The larger ones don't work at all with USB jacks that are too close to other ports. Also, the cheapest ones can have relatively poor reception.

If your laptop has a plug-in card slot, it's either for PC Cards or the more recent ExpressCard type. Your user manual will tell you. Verizon offers one of each. They don't stick out so far, which makes them a little more rugged while in use, though you should still remove them before putting away the laptop. I find them more convenient than the USB type.

The Novatel MiFi 2372 connects up to five Wi-Fi devices to 3G mobile broadband networks.

(Credit: Novatel Wireless)

A portable access point is worth considering if you have more than one gizmo to connect to the Internet while you're traveling. For most North American users there's only one such device available, the Novatel MiFi.

Sprint and Verizon offer the MiFi 2200, which provides typical download speeds from 400Kbps to 1.4Mbps (Verizon's estimate; actual speeds vary widely).

Novatel also makes the MiFi 2372, which works on AT&T, T-Mobile, and pretty much any international phone network. This is the one I want, but as far as I can tell AT&T and T-Mobile don't offer discounted pricing on this gizmo yet. If purchased directly from a mail-order supplier, it's very expensive--well over $300.

Whichever version you get, the MiFi is a standalone gadget a little smaller than an iPhone. It has its own battery and recharges with a small wall adapter or by connecting it to your laptop (which makes it work like a USB wireless modem). It connects to the cellular data network and creates its own little Wi-Fi hot spot that can be used by up to five systems at once--like your laptop and an iPod Touch.

I don't have one of these myself, but friends do, and it looks like the most convenient way to get online while traveling.

As an aside, I should mention that one of the earliest mobile broadband/Wi-Fi gizmos was developed by a friend of mine, Tor Amundson. He called it the Stompbox, and wrote about it for Make magazine. More information is available on one of his sites, Stompboxnetworks.com.

Earlier this year, Tor told me about an interesting alternative to the MiFi. Cradlepoint makes gizmos that are functionally equivalent to the MiFi, except they work with a user-provided USB or ExpressCard modem. While this approach is noteworthy, I think the MiFi is generally a better solution for most users.

The last option is to get a 3G-compatible cell phone that supports "tethering"--that is, using the cellphone itself as a modem. This can work pretty well, though I had a lot of trouble tethering the Cingular 8525 phone I had before I got the Option card.

The major downside of tethering is that you may not be able to talk on the phone while using the Internet. Apparently AT&T and T-Mobile 3G phones are more likely to support simultaneous operation than those on Verizon or Sprint. I regard this limitation as unacceptable, though you might feel differently. The upsides are that tethering can be somewhat cheaper than getting a separate 3G modem because there's only one contract, and there's nothing else to carry around.

(The iPhone still doesn't allow tethering.)

The most important thing to keep in mind, no matter how you get online, is that mobile Internet usage is quite strictly limited by all carriers. Verizon's $40/month service provides only 250 MB/month of data transfer, and that can run out very quickly. Even the $60 service's 5GB limit can be exceeded in mere days if you spend too much time on YouTube or some other video streaming service.

If you go over your plan limit, per-megabyte charges are really painful. According to Verizon, the 5GB overage rate is 5 cents/MB and the 250MB overage rate is 10 cents/MB. In other words, a single HD video on YouTube could easily cost you a few dollars to watch once you're over the limit.

For comparison purposes, AT&T's overage fees are $10/100MB for its $40/month plan and 49 cents/MB for the $60/month plan. The latter rate is the cell phone equivalent of the death penalty, since hardly anyone is going to go only a few megabytes over the 5GB allotment. A careless user could easily incur hundreds of dollars in overage fees in a single month.

So whatever you buy, be careful how you use it. And if you share your connection (using a MiFi, or via Internet Connection Sharing in Windows), make sure your friends stay away from Hulu.

Another thing to consider is whether you need international access. If you intend to travel a lot, you can get a wireless modem that will work in most foreign countries. Be sure to ask about the countries that matter to you; Japan and South Korea, in particular, have very specific requirements. What Verizon calls "Global Ready" modems are somewhat more expensive to buy, but again, be warned: international roaming can be *very* expensive. (In the U.S., the charges are the same as for any other 3G modem.)

In my opinion, the best way to get Internet access while traveling internationally is to find cheap or free Wi-Fi hot spots and skip the mobile broadband. This approach is less convenient, but there's no risk of coming home to a very expensive bill from your cell phone company.