This story was updated at 11:40 a.m. PDT with correct units for DSL broadband speeds currently on the market.
A Silicon Valley Democrat in the U.S. Congress is proposing a new auction of unused radio spectrum, but with some ambitious strings attached: The winner would have to offer a free, wireless broadband network that reaches 95 percent of the American population within a decade.
Voicing disappointment that familiar large wireless carriers scooped up the most significant share of airwaves in a recently concluded auction, Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) on Thursday introduced the Wireless Internet Nationwide for Families Act, which would direct the Federal Communications Commission to auction off a band of wireless spectrum between 2,155 megahertz and 2,180MHz that currently lies fallow and impose detailed rules on the winning bidder. Rep. Ed Markey, the Massachusetts Democrat who leads a House telecommunications and Internet panel, and Rep. Chris Cannon, a Utah Republican, have signed on as co-sponsors.
Under the proposed measure, aside from offering the free broadband network, the network operator would have to:
• begin offering "always-on" broadband service within two years of receiving the license
• offer a service free of subscription fees, airtime, usage or other charges to consumers and "authorized public safety users"
• ensure the service offers at least 200 kilobits per second transmission speeds in at least one direction (a far cry from the 768 kilobits per second speeds associated with most entry-level DSL lines)
• outfit the free service with "a technology protection measure or measures that protect underage users from accessing obscene or indecent material through such service"
• publish royalty-free standards so that others can develop and deploy equipment that can operate on the network
Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.)
(Credit: U.S. House of Representatives)"While the auction required under this legislation is open to anyone, it is my hope that the bold conditions of requiring free, family friendly service will encourage the entry of a new kind of national broadband service provider," Eshoo said in a statement.
The requirements, however, sound strikingly similar to a plan that a Silicon Valley start-up called M2Z Networks offered to the FCC in recent years.
Specifically, M2Z sought permission to obtain a 15-year exclusive, nationwide license to essentially the same band of spectrum described in the Eshoo bill. It wanted to offer a "free," advertising-supported tier of service that would offer speeds of at least 384Kbps down and 128Kbps up, and a "premium" tier with 3Mbps speeds. And, like the Eshoo bill, M2Z pledged to reach 95 percent of the American population within 10 years and outfit the free tier with filters designed to block obscene content.
The FCC dismissed that petition, opting to undertake its usual public comment and rulemaking process before deciding who would control the spectrum. It has reportedly already begun moving ahead with that process, although it wasn't clear when it would finish.
An Eshoo aide said her boss had conversations with M2Z while drafting the bill, but her motivation was "primarily to provide alternative means of broadband access for more Americans, and this fallow spectrum seemed to be a real opportunity."
M2Z CEO John Muleta said the bill's introduction is a hopeful sign for would-be new entrants like his firm. "What we've been advocating for is, there needs to be new entry, not necessarily more regulation, to do innovative and unusual things that would get more broadband to more people," he said in a telephone interview with CNET News.com.
An array of consumer groups supported M2Z's idea, but the wireless industry opposed its original petition, calling it a "self-serving attempt to gain access to valuable spectrum outside of the auction process."
The new House proposal doesn't appear to be much better in the industry's eyes. Joe Farren, a spokesman for CTIA-The Wireless Association, said his group objects to the stringent conditions it would impose on bidders, saying flexible conditions would ultimately raise more money for the federal treasury.
"We agree with Congresswoman Eshoo that additional spectrum must be made available and we look forward to working with her on this important endeavor," he said in an e-mail on Friday. "However, mandating how providers should deploy and use such spectrum is something we can't support."
Chipmaker Intel has doubled down on China, announcing Tuesday that it has launched its second venture capital fund for the region.
Intel Capital China Technology Fund II is a $500 million fund that will focus on investments in start-ups doing work in areas such as wireless broadband, media, telecommunications, and "clean technology."
Over the past five years, the Chinese government has been trying to promote innovationand is working on developing a Nasdaq-like market for young companies.
"Given the success of the original China Fund--with investments in more than 28 companies--it is time to renew our commitment," Cadol Cheung, Intel Capital Asia Pacific managing director, said in a statement.
Intel plans to use the new fund to participate in larger rounds and even serve as the lead investor, Cheung noted.
Under its China Technology Fund II, Intel has funded two companies: Holdfast Online Technology and Newauto Video Technology.
Holdfast hosts third-party console games that allow gamers to compete against each other over a wide area network, while Newauto develops and markets video equipment, networking software, and system integrations for Chinese TV stations.
The chip giant's latest fund is more than double the size of its original $200 million Intel Capital China Technology Fund, which was founded in 2005.
Intel Capital, prior to creating a fund in China, had been investing in Chinese companies since 1998, either in specific areas such as communications in or regional funds.
Are Wi-Fi hot spots going the way of public telephone booths?
Johan Bergendahl, chief marketing officer for wireless-equipment maker Ericsson, thinks they are. During his keynote address on Monday at the European Computer Audit, Control and Security Conference in Stockholm, Bergendahl told an audience that as more people use wireless broadband fewer people will use Wi-Fi hot spots in public places.
"Hot spots at places like Starbucks are becoming the telephone boxes of the broadband era," Bergendahl was quoted as saying in a post by the IDG News Service.
Bergendahl argued that wireless broadband is growing faster than mixed or fixed telephony. And that eventually people will have no need to connect to hot spots, because wireless broadband will be baked into their laptops and other devices. And service will be available everywhere.
Of course, these comments should be taken with a pinch of salt. Ericsson sells wireless equipment to cell phone companies. It doesn't make Wi-Fi gear. So it shouldn't come as a shock that the company would publicly slam Wi-Fi, while promoting its own flavor of wireless broadband, called HSPA (High Speed Packet Access).
In some ways, I agree with Bergendahl. Wi-Fi has its limitations. But I don't see the technology fading into the sunset just yet, or going the way of the public telephone booth anytime soon.
The pros and cons of Wi-Fi
It's true that Wi-Fi signals don't travel over long distances, making coverage spotty at best. This also means that because hot spots are often independently run within the confines of a limited space, like coffee shops or airports, there's no seamless, ubiquitous coverage. I'm the first to admit that I'm annoyed when my signal drops and I'm forced to re-sign into wireless hot spots.
Broadband wireless service through a carrier definitely offers wider coverage. And it's more convenient. But it's expensive. In the U.S., Verizon Wireless charges $60 a month for 5GB of downloads per month and $40 a month for a service that allows 50MB of downloads per month. By contrast, many Wi-Fi hot spots are free. And if they aren't free, people can pay by the hour or by the day to use the services, a great option for casual users who need wireless broadband only occasionally.
There are other issues associated with wireless broadband offered through carriers. Because carriers use different technology standards to build networks, access cards from one provider can't be used on another's network. This is one reason why embedding 3G wireless service into laptops hasn't taken off. Consumers don't want to be locked into a single wireless broadband provider the way they are with a cell phone provider.
This could be changing. Qualcomm has introduced a chipset called Gobi that operates on CDMA2000 EV-DO and UMTS HSPA networks worldwide. This could allow laptop makers to sell notebooks with embedded radios that could be used over different networks, theoretically allowing people to roam between networks. Gobi chipsets are expected to start appearing in laptops in the second quarter of 2008.
Another significant reason Wi-Fi isn't going to die anytime soon is because it's already in wide use in millions of end-user devices. And because the technology is standardized and manufactured in bulk, it's relatively cheap. This has helped it become almost a standard feature in any laptop computer sold today. And it's already getting installed on other small handheld devices like music players, such as the iPod Touch from Apple. Handset makers are also including Wi-Fi in their phones. And other consumer electronics makers are embedding Wi-Fi into home entertainment products to eliminate wires.
I agree with Bergendahl that wireless broadband will grow phenomenally in the next few years. But I am not convinced that the rise of 3G or even 4G wireless broadband services means the end of Wi-Fi. In fact, I see the two technologies co-existing.
Even though wireless broadband signals travel over longer distances than Wi-Fi, coverage inside buildings is often poor. Because of this fact, wireless broadband may be used outdoors, while Wi-Fi is used indoors. T-Mobile's Wi-Fi at Home already offers this type of service for its voice customers. Subscribers to the service use Wi-Fi when at home, and the T-Mobile cellular network when outside the home. This hybrid approach could also work well for broadband services. And it would also help carriers better control bandwidth usage on their networks.
Editor's note: This story incorrectly stated the speed of M2Z's premium service offering. The correct speed is 3 megabits per second.
A Silicon Valley start-up that sought permission to build a "free, family-friendly" wireless Internet service on a stretch of unused radio spectrum has been shot down by federal regulators.
Late Friday, the Federal Communications Commission rejected a nearly 16-month-old petition by Menlo Park, Calif.-based M2Z Networks to receive an exclusive, 15-year license to build and operate such a network in the 2155MHz-to-2175MHz band, in return for depositing a portion of its revenues into the U.S. Treasury. In the same order, the FCC also rejected a similar proposal from a company called NetFreeUS. (Click here for a PDF of the FCC's order.)
The FCC said it wasn't persuaded that allowing a single company to control the slice of spectrum without first seeking broader comment on how the band should be used would serve the public interest. The regulators concluded that it's preferable to conduct their usual rule-making process to set parameters for the spectrum's use--a move that would begin "shortly," they said.
"Many have suggested that we should auction this spectrum, while still others suggest that due to the high demand for this spectrum we should consider unlicensed use of the band," FCC Chairman Kevin Martin said in a statement. "Each of these proposals has merit, and consideration of either would be inappropriately foreclosed by granting forbearance in this instance."
M2Z's plan was to offer a free, ad-supported network--plus the cost of a "reception device"--that would include a mandatory filtering system designed "to block access to sites purveying pornographic, obscene or indecent material." Users who didn't want the filters or wanted speeds faster than 384 kilobits per second down and 128Kbps up could upgrade to a "premium" service, at an unspecified cost, that would give subscribers access to 3-megabit-per-second speeds.
Some politicians heralded the plan because of the filtering features and what some perceived as ambitious "build-out" goals--that is, reaching 95 percent of the American population within a decade of the project's start. Some public safety officials also endorsed the plan because M2Z pledged to let them hook up whatever devices they pleased to the free network.
The regulators, in their order, said they were unimpressed by the "relatively slow speed" M2Z planned to offer its users and said the company's proposed network construction benchmarks were not "particularly aggressive."
The wireless industry had strongly opposed the idea, arguing it was a self-serving attempt on M2Z's part to sidestep the ordinary process for auctioning off vacant spectrum.
A loose coalition of public interest groups also recently voiced reservations (click for PDF) about M2Z's commitment to requiring network filters on the free service, arguing such a plan raises First Amendment concerns. The filing, penned by the Media Access Project, said the group wasn't convinced the band even needs to be licensed, but if it is, the group urged the FCC to impose Net neutrality requirements on those who license that slice of spectrum and require that they sell it on a wholesale basis.
M2Z's next steps weren't immediately clear. The firm's chief executive, John Muleta, told Bloomberg News that he would be active in whatever proceedings follow but hadn't yet decided whether to appeal the FCC's decision.
Qwest Wireless customers will soon be able to wirelessly surf the Net at 3G speeds on their laptops.
The company says it will offer its customers wireless broadband service using Sprint Nextel's evolution data optimized (EVDO) network. Qwest has been using the Sprint wireless network to provide nationwide coverage for its cellular subscribers since 2003. Now the carrier will be able to offer nationwide broadband wireless too.
Qwest Mobile Broadband customers can choose one of three plans based on the amount of data they will be uploading or downloading. Service plans start at $70 a month. The unlimited plan costs $80, but according to Qwest?s terms and conditions the service is capped at 5 gigabytes of data transmission per month. So it's not really unlimited.
- prev
- 1
- next
