Stewy85
Premium
join:2003-01-16
Sharon, WI
clubs: | Good
WOOHOO! Maybe we can get cheap broadband now.
--
0111010001110010011101010111010001101000 |
|
WillHaeck
join:2002-01-20
Monroe, WA | Not a cheap solution
BPL won't be the way to cheap broadband, its just another way to deliver the same old screw to the consumer. |
|
Mellow
Premium
join:2001-11-16
Salisbury, MD | key word "rural"
Thats fine if they use it for the boondocks applications. Just dont bring that crap into the big city screwing up everything else. Im sure alot of people would rather have this than satellite. |
|
Gandalf4503
join:2002-06-27
Las Vegas, NV | reply to Stewy85
Re: Good
This isn't good. It's going to suck in the long run. |
|
Balzer
Cat Man Dew
join:2000-12-18
Tulsa
 ·Cox HSI
|  reply to Stewy85
Good for who?
Well I'm glad that VOIP will take a hit as well.
BPL will hurt far more that it will help. What will YOU do when the EMS crews can't get the address right or a plane crashes in to a school? It's been said way to many times already. I think if anything happens due to BPL interference then the people that pay for it should be held accountable for any problems from the system. All radio services will be hurt by BPL!
--
Televangelists are The Pro Wrestlers of religion! |
|
acehyde
Tired.
Premium
join:2001-08-14
clubs: | Alright!!!
Now, finally I may be able to get broadband at my house.
Hopefully, people living in very rural portions of the US will be able to take advantage of this (like me  ) |
|
AD7BK
Premium
join:2000-03-23
Port Orchard, WA
·wavebroadband
2 edits | I truely hope you all are happy
I hope those who get it don't have the old 49 MHZ phones or have 49 MHZ walkie talkies, or have R/C toys, or pick up channels 2-5 off the air, or use CB radio or listen to shortwave because BPL is going to destroy it. I am very very disappointed in the FCC. Micheal Powell, Kathrine, and others at the FCC have been given a lot of money to say "OK" to it. (Sarcasm) Well Thanks a lot FCC you just destroyed the HF spectrum. And remember those who want BPL you will not be able to use any of the above. And when someone uses a CB or Ham radio it will interfere with your internet connection. And there is nothing you can do about it. You can complain but the FCC will say "it is a part 15 device we cannot help you." Part 15 devices must accept interference and must not cause interference to licensed services or part 95 services.
Sure they can NOTCH out the various bands but that will degrade the service.
I am sorry folks but BPL is a joke. No matter what you say not matter how you will hate Ham Operators, CB Radio users, and other users of the frequencies between 2mhz to 80 mhz BPL will have zero protection from anything that is in there. I can see a lot of the BPL users try to tear down peoples antennas because they cant get their mail or what ever.
If you get it and you have a CB-er or a Ham near you except it to drop.
It has been proven that 10 watts from a ham transmitter or as little as 4 watts from a CB radio can kill BPL. So I am waiting for when everyone gets it then complains to the FCC then watch it be dropped like a hot potato.
In my mind the FCC has been greased by the greedy corporations (Power and BPL Modem makers) so I have zero faith in the FCC for protection of the Licensed services.
We will see when there is a emergency and the Red Cross cannot use any HF or the military cannot communicate or ARES/RACES (Amateur radio for those who are clueless as to that org) cannot use the HF band for emergency communications because BPL noise wipes out the receivers of the hams trying to do whatever emergency. (flood fire anything they get involved in) Homeland security will too also suffer the effects of BPL
BPL is not a good IDEA unless they go up into the 5ghz frequencies or finds some way to use Spread Spectrum (Which will be a good way to completely eliminate interference)
--
The following statement is true...
The Proceeding statement was false!!
--George Carlin |
|
w2co
join:2003-07-16
Longmont, CO
| reply to Mellow
Re: key word "rural"
It has also been said many times that it will not be profitable to deploy in remote areas, the big cities are the first place it will be deployed as the customer base there is much larger. Another BIG mistake by the FCC. This may be good in a way for now, the problems will show up big time as soon as larger areas are wiped out by the RF hash created. I wonder when the NTIA study will be released? |
|
kv5e
Ride Free
Premium
join:2001-12-04
Mesquite, TX
| Part 15 Untouched
This is a compromise NPRM as the Part 15 rules were not relaxed to allow greater emission field strengths for the BPL carrier.
This really is a poor implementation of connectivity for Internet access. It's a cheap way out for the service providers and it will be very troublesome for the users.
What really bothers me is I like to be a good neighbor. Now when someones' modem loses block sync because I want to operate HF, I will have to explain to the neighbor, it's not my fault. I am licensed, meet the spectral emission requirements, and I am a primary user of the spectrum.
Sorry, you are SOL. You've been chumped by the Power Company!
KiloVolt 5 Electron Legally QRMing friends by FCC NPRM |
|
RFJock
join:2004-01-13
Norfolk, VA
| Where is Prospect Street?
Interesting that according to recent announcements, Prospect Street Broadband was supposed to have "gone live" with BPL in Manassas some 4 weeks ago. And yet I see no listing for them as an ISP here on BBR and can find no sub reviews of their service. Wonder if they hav'nt actually gone live yet? |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02 | Good question. I haven't heard much either since the initial hooplah. I'll dig a bit on that.... |
|
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA | reply to RFJock
»www.prospectstreet.com/psb/ |
|
Freezone
join:2000-09-29
Southfield, MI | reply to AD7BK
Re: I truely hope you all are happy
It was a tough call, but that old tech has to be pushed aside for the new... The world will be IP based. Anyway I doubt this will be deployed nearly as wide as people seem to believe. And it will prob be slower than dsl ever was to deploy. |
|
tenbase
join:2000-07-19
Alexandria, VA
| Nothing has changed
First impressions, having not read the NPRM. And remember, the FCC release is JUST a proposal, not actual rules. Once the NPRM is released, the comments period begins.
BPL was already legal to deploy as long as it met Part 15 emission limits, and this is where the FCC's NPRM comes into play:
1. The BPL industry wanted Part 15 limits relaxed, the FCC said NO.
2. Unlike any other Part 15 device, BPL equipment must use "adaptive interference-mitigation techniques". Given the BPL industries continuing claims that there is no interference potential, that is pretty telling.
3. All BPL deployments and equipment locations must be 'registered', so there will be no hiding from the imminent interference complaints.
Without going into great detail on the above points, BPL vendors are soon going to realize that there are so many restrictions that deploying this technology is going to cost a lot more than they had anticipated. Further, there have been reports of electrical utilities flat-out refusing to touch BPL due to the RFI issues.
--
I would kill everyone on this forum for a drop of sweet beer.. |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| quote:
1. The BPL industry wanted Part 15 limits relaxed, the FCC said NO.
That's perspective, and can easily be rephrased as
quote:
1. Several government agencies and radio hobbyists wanted Part 15 limits raised, the FCC said NO.
|
|
RFJock
join:2004-01-13
Norfolk, VA
| reply to dadkins
Re: Where is Prospect Street?
Totally worthless media hype. Simply designed to hook subs, and no substantive information on system status or subscriber objective reviews other than the ones the handpicked for the subs propaganda page. They seem to be very hush-hush about where the system is active, how many subs are live and how the system is performing. |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02 | And actually that website wasn't even up the day the Manassas trial was announced..... |
|
icp1
Premium
join:2000-10-13
Saint Louis, MO
clubs: | reply to RFJock
My Mother in law lives in Manassas and signed up for the BPL setup there, but it isn't live as of yet at her house, so my guess is no where is ready quite yet.
When she gets hooked up I will get more info. |
|
tenbase
join:2000-07-19
Alexandria, VA
| reply to Karl Bode
Re: Nothing has changed
The BPL industry was specifically asking for Part 15 regs to be relaxed in order to deploy this tech, and the FCC refused. I'd say that's a "No".
The fact several government agencies and radio hobbyists opposed relaxing Part 15 regs in reaction to the BPL lobby proposal is pretty inconsequential.
--
I would kill everyone on this forum for a drop of sweet beer.. |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| (Monkey) Business as Usual at the FCC
Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein played the middle. "We need to be mindful of harmful interference, but we can’t let unsupported claims stand in the way of this kind of innovation."
Adelstein said this despite several computer models showing the interference potential and field measurements. But then the FCC turns around and promotes unproven adaptive technologies as a solution to interference mitigation. Common sense thinking about this shows that it's unlikely it will prevent the problems we foresee. What makes this even worse is that they met with a BPL vendor around the end of January discussing adaptive technologies. Coincidence ? I think not 
Also, how is a Dark Ages style radiating wired network considered "innovation"? Once again the technical ineptness of our Commisioners shine through.
The FCC ignored 5000 comments against BPL and didn't wait until the NTIA released their test results. This speaks volumes. The FCC will do whatever it wants and will follow the money, regardless of public outcry. We saw it happen with media ownership. |
|
