battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000 | The map is missleading
The map is not accurate. It is not even remotely accurate in the North Georgia/Chattanooga area. |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
2 edits | It is a bit strange, it shows a massive coverage area in the upstate NY region of largely rural communities around Binghamton that I'm fairly sure does not exist. I'm going to try and get a hold of Webster to talk about it...
I've updated the story above with a more detailed description of how data was collected from both WISPs and the map creator. |
|
battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000
| It looks to me that they are using the same method that the FCC uses. If one address in a zip code has wireless then they all do.
Chattanooga has 3 ISPs that also have wireless networks. I am rather familiar with the coverage of all 3 networks and I know that there are areas that are not served that the maps shows as served. |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
1 edit | It looks to me that they are using the same method that the FCC uses. If one address in a zip code has wireless then they all do. That was my thought as well -- but I'll try to confirm. |
|
T1 Rocky
join:2002-11-15
Dallas, TX | It might not be accurate or perfect....but at least it is SOMETHING! At least now there's something to build on. |
|
battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000
| The problem is that it appears that it's not ever remotely accurate. I think it does more damage than good. It's helping out the large Cable and Telcos by giving them a chance to tell the FCC "See I told you we have competition from other providers." |
|
WA Resident
@genext.net
| reply to battleop
This map is missing large areas of central WA which have wireless. One rural county is almost entirely blanketed with wireless but it's not shown on the map.
»www.dccn.net/MapsAndAvailability···aps.aspx
Also, some guy down the street just ordered WildBlue satellite when there is already wireless available and the fiber network which is under construction is set to go live by next month. |
|
cyberbroadband
@hiwaay.net
| how the map works
We're a wireless ISP in north alabama. We've given Brian the GPS coords of our towers and he has drawn a circle around them at a 10 mile radius. He has also taken the zip code of all WISPs who have registered with him and done the same. A few WISPS have actually been able to give him exact coverage data and if he has that, he's placed that on the map (look in northeast alabama for example). Overall, it is a good representation of where there is a WISP presence - even if you may not have heard of us. |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| No wisps near me
We did have one but they stop servicing our area in Oct of last year. No tna issue for me sicne I have access to both cable and DSL but friends that live a few miles outside city limits prety much are stuck with satellite or EVDO which actually means no broadband.
Some people still want to think that the internet is a luxury, but in fact it's determining home values. Not having access to broadband is almost like having a house that doesn't have access to electricty or phone service. I know for me personally whether or not I have access to broadband is 1st on my list. No broadband I move on to the next house. |
|
jester121
Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL | reply to T1 Rocky
Re: The map is missleading
Given the choice between "nothing" and a big steaming pile of bull shit, I'll take the nothing thanks.
Fudging numbers even a little bit puts the entire project in a dubious light, and makes it easier to dismiss the entire thing. |
|
Middleofknowwher
@WYOMING.NET
| It's fairly accurate.......
there are some portions of the map that looks a bit suspect.
For my part, I have not submitted my data yet. It will be based on propagation studies that have been tuned using real world data. The software I use is EDX (www.edx.com) and costs around $17,000 per copy. It is very accurate.
There is other software that is mostly accurate, especially if the user knows how to program it correctly. (»www.cplus.org/rmw/english1.html)
There are far more WISPs out there than many suspect. We can deploy broadband faster than any of the large providers and 99.99% of us have much better customer service. What we are lacking is capital to expand into area that are not / under served.
Look around, you'd be surprised at how many WISPs there are and where. |
|
jester121
Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
 ·surpasshosting
 ·ViaTalk
| reply to cyberbroadband
Re: how the map works
The ZIP code of their mailing/office address? That seems like a pretty silly approach.
Some of the WISPs around here in the past were real fly-by-night operations, and the "office" was the basement of the guy's house -- nowhere near his towers. |
|
WISP too
@wirelessbeehive.com
|  Coverage and Availability
The idea behind the broadband portion of the stimulus plan is to bolster the existing RUS/USDA (and other federal agency) programs that encourage utility expansion and broadband penetration. The goal of Brian's mapping project is to show the government (and public at large) where there is at least some kind of existing terrestrial wireless broadband coverage, and that WISPs are bigger and more abundant than many people realize. The WISP data is being cleaned up daily as more volunteers get in on the action.
There are allegations of large outside companies that come into an area, claim there is no broadband (due to poor or no penetration by rural telco or cable co for example), get grant money, and either sit on it or deploy a little (if any) service. The problem stems from the fact that there is little or no documentation showing that services exist in the area. The local companies (wireless or wireline) who have a vested interest in serving their areas go to apply for grants in their home territory only to find out someone's already claimed it.
Worse yet, some of the local wireline incumbents claim little or no coverage when they apply for grants when a local WISP is already filling in the wireline co's holes (i.e. no money should be awarded, but it is because the USDA guy doesn't know the WISP exists).
This map and its related data are intended to help correct those problems.
For those who have never heard of fixed wireless, it's terrestrial (earth-bound) and uses some of the same microwave technologies that large entities (gov't & commercial) use for mountain- or building-top communications, just on a smaller scale. Fixed wireless is on par with most cable and DSL systems, and in many places better (not as saturated).
Just like everybody complains about their wireline providers, you're going to get the occasional lousy wireless provider. And admittedly yes, there are those fly-by-nites that give the whole industry a black eye, which is a real shame. There are many good-sized well-run operations that hopefully make up for it. |
|
radiowebst
join:2009-02-02
Cooperstown, NY
| reply to Middleofknowwher
Re: It's fairly accurate.......
I'm the author of the map and do realize it is not perfect. This whole thing was done as a volunteer project. Right now the WISP industry can't even tell you how many WISP's there are let alone the coverage area. The map was started using zip codes out of the WISP Directory and had a 10 mile circle drawn around those. Later the directory was updated to allow WISP's to input their zip codes served on the FCC form 477. Once WISP's saw that there is a real industry presence I started to get better data with things like AP locations or total network polygons. For my clients who had RF maps produced, some have allowed me to use that information on the map. If there is service in an area that is not on the map, it is because that WISP has not provided either myself or the WISP directory with any data. This whole project has relied on voluntary reporting. Many WISP's still may not even be aware of this effort.
Tools like Radio Mobile and EDX will produce a much more accurate map and are definitely the preferred way to do this but I'm not able to do each an every WISP network propagation for free. The purpose of this project is to give WISP's as a whole, something to speak for against the cable and telco op's when they go to legislators and grab all this public funding. WISP's have never been able to even come close to telling how much area or how many homes are passed. Cable and Telco operators can, and that is what politicians respond to. The numbers that those industries quote are not perfect either. Fact of the matter is, something had to start from somewhere when it came to this map. There may be a chance to go back and build coverage areas based on proper RF propagation. We are looking at the option of a grant to fund the effort. Remember, less than 2 weeks ago there was nothing to look at and complain that it's not accurate  And there was nobody stepping up to do it for free either. There is always room for improvement and constructive suggestions are always welcome. |
|
stan393
@Level3.net
| comments of bf69
bf69 hit the nail on the head ...i am hoping to move my mobile home so i can at least get cable modem ...which at that location works sometimes. right now cable is one mile down the road and they ain't interested in expanding ...unless the money is handed to them thru the spendulist plan of obama-rama-dingdong. at&t seems to be stingy with dslam's down here in ms. i heard that both cable and telcos would prefer there are 25 homes per mile b4 they expand...still waiting in ms |
|
knightmb
Everybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| reply to radiowebst
Re: It's fairly accurate.......
Don't let them get to you, we all know it's not an exact science. I'm going to try and send as much detail about my WISP as I can to you, so that you can add another pixel to the Tennessee part of the map 
--
Fight NebuAD and the like:
Click Here to pollute their data |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to stan393
Re: comments of bf69
said by stan393 :
i heard that both cable and telcos would prefer there are 25 homes per mile b4 they expand...still waiting in ms
I have a friend whose subdivison has more than that and it's maybe 1/3 of a mile and nobody will give them broadband. |
|
SuperWISP
join:2007-04-17
Laramie, WY
| This is a great effort, but WISPs do need to be careful.
As the nation debates how best to deploy broadband to every citizen, WISPs do need to publicize their existence and coverage. However, their tower locations are sensitive proprietary information -- especially in these times, when the Federal government makes it so difficult for WISPs to operate and makes it so easy for incumbents to engage in anticompetitive practices.
Publish accurate data about a WISP's tower locations, and large corporations such as the telcos and cable companies will indeed use it to target anticompetitive practices, such as service priced below cost. And unfortunately, there are some WISPs (not many, but there are bad apples in every barrel) who will intentionally interfere with others' signals in an attempt to gain competitive advantage. (I have had two do this to me over the 16+ years I've been in business as a WISP.) So, we prefer the "radius around the Zip Code" method of mapping to the precise mapping of access points. It provides a very good picture of how much coverage there is. And since there are all kinds of imponderables (trees, tall buildings, hills, etc.) that can affect coverage, it's about as accurate as giving exact tower locations. |
|
jameswade
join:2001-12-09
Hot Springs, NC
 ·US Cellular
·Verizon BroadbandA..
·AT&T Southeast
| The zip code method is increasingly inaccurate as the zip code size increases and terrain has more obstacles.
We have a WISP in our county very close to the center of our zip code, but many of us our closer to a different zip code so the zip code method doesn't help us .
Anyone can figure out where your site is with a little work - trying to hide a point source transmitter's location is not going to work.
I've had Verizon give me this argument about cell tower location, but it's a specious argument. I just wanted to point my antenna correctly in mountainous terrain. If I was a competitor I'd just drive around until I had three measurements and triangulate.
Flat land maybe, mountainous terrain no. |
|
radiowebst
join:2009-02-02
Cooperstown, NY
| My take on the topic of competition is this. If your market is large enough you will always have the threat of competition from various sources. They will more than likely have some clueless marketing department that would just look at raw numbers for households or population counts and say it meets their criteria to build. If you are lucky and they have a smart marketing department, they will also look to see who already has built in this market. If the numbers are already marginal they may pass knowing that there will be little to no chance of making profit based on the fact there will only be so many possible customers and then they will be split among competition.
If you have your network and business out there for all to see the competition's marketing department may see it as well and possibly abandon building a marginal market. Now they could always be stubborn and build anyway creating grief for you. Thing is, if they are apt to do this, advertising your network coverage would not make any difference anyway. As far as the days of people building wireless just to interfere, I think with the economy the way it is, that is much less likely to happen. With the newer wireless gear you can work around most of those situations.
I guess what I am trying to say is hiding your network in fear of competition also hurts your own business because your potential customers don't know you are there either. |
|
