FCC: Broadband Mission Not Accomplished > Wrong FCC priorities, that's why

Wrong FCC priorities, that's why

I was about to write the same thing. This is nothing less than birdcage liner designed to fluff up Julius "give it all to the big 2" Genachowski's defense of his plan to hand over as much as 1 GHz of existing wireless spectrum to his handlers at AT&T Wireless and Verizon Wireless. This guy is worse than Martin, and that's quite an accomplishment.

reply to fifty nine
I'm fine with the FCC grabbing some decent spectrum, but it should be light-licensed (a la 3.65GHz) to whoever wants it. THat way cordless phoens and baby monitors stay off the spectrum, and wireless internet providers can get on and serve people.

You don't need 500MHz of spectrum either, though it's sorta nice to have. 80MHz at a lowish frequency for subscribers (four non-overlapping 20MHz channels so you can do 90 degree sector antennas on a single tower without any interference) and 40MHz at a higher frequency for backhauls. Heck, if they're feeling magnanimous add 10-20 MHz at a really low frequency (700MHz or better) for penetrating tree cover for some customers. The 80MHz can be between 1500 and 2400 MHz somewhere, and the 40MHz can simply be a redesignation of spectrum usage between 5.2 and 5.8.

There's only so much copper wiring (which we have plenty of) can do. Fiber is the future/awesome and bonded ADSL2+ Annex M can provide 20/3 service to rural subdivisions and such with no problem. However if the telcos don't want to do that (and realistically only a handful of companies should be laying down facilities for a given copper pair) then wireless (light-licensed) gives the opportunity for people to move in and deliver the bandwidth people want with an economy that allows for healthy competition.

That said, any additional allocated spectrum should have a significant build-out requirement (like the 850MHz cellular band did way back when it was doled out in 25MHz chunks to two providers total, one usually being the local telephone company, the other usually not being the local telco) if the FCC is going to auction it off exclusively to a single carrier, or should be light licensed so that multiple providers can get in and do something useful. Otherwise you're just lining Verizon and AT&T's pockets for the most part, which allows them to perpetuate the "serve who you feel like" model with data service that isn't going to meet the needs of today or tomorrow when it comes to actual home broadband.

Though, to be fair, a significant amount of 1700MHz and 700MHz spectrum got purchased by smaller companies who are just now getting around to building it out...don't paint the picture in colors too bleak.

reply to 56403739