 |  | Nighttime
join:2001-11-30 | Re: Reliable wireless internet over power lines? Its nice that they are trying it so this mess will be over shortly after it fails due to both science fact about unshielded wire transmission and the cost to implement/ handle lawsuits that will come due to it. | |
| 
richk_1957
If ..Then..Else
Premium
join:2001-04-11
Minas Tirith
| Not Again!!! There have been trials throughout the country that have failed for one reason or another (although the article states Virginia, Indiana and Kentucky that have implemented BPL.), other countries have tried & dropped it so, when are the power companies [which, I think are not so humanitarian as they put themselves to be, they just want a chunk of the broadband pie. In other words $$$$$] going to learn. And in no way could it provide faster speeds at lower costs, IMHO. | |
| 
CXDamian26
I Am N00b, Here Me Roar
Premium
join:2002-12-01
Wichita, KS | Will it never end? Wouldn't be surprised to see a trial around here soon too... | |
| stebbinsgr
join:2001-05-17
Fort Wayne, IN
 ·Verizon FIOS
| BPL Bad....Wireless GOOD As an amateur radio operator I do not think they will ever get BPL working clean enough that it won't interefere with some spectrum of normal over the air frequencies. As a memeber of the ARRL we want to see propagation of wireless technology rather then BPL. The BPL experiment in Iowa failed miserably. It creates too much harmonic interference that will actually violate the FCC's own rules.
Fort Wayne, IN | |
| | Sunburn
join:2000-10-05
Denver, CO
| Re: BPL Bad....Wireless GOOD "Broadband Horizons Launches SUCCESSFUL Pilot Projects Using BPL Technology"
And the nay sayer's are telling us what?
"With SIGNIFICANT funding from banks and investors, a highly experienced core management team, and established partnerships with utilities, manufacturers and other complementary businesses, Broadband Horizons is poised to roll out BPL in 50-plus communities in Texas and beyond over the next several years."
LoL so much for the bogus prohibitive cost theory propagated by delusional hams.
More evidence:
"Pricing for Broadband Horizons' BPL service will be competitive or LOWER priced than other broadband offerings, with the goal to lower barriers to entry for new broadband users."
Now, let the pessimism begin... | |
| | | | | | | gojeda
join:2002-12-15
Pompano Beach, FL
| Re: BPL Bad....Wireless GOOD said by Mike  :
"a highly experienced core management team"
Translations, we can't fire these asshats because they've been here too long.
Oh yea - an we all know how management never loses a job in this country, right? Pftttahaha! | |
| | | 
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
clubs: | In other words, f**K everyone else, it's all about the money. | |
| | | | 
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| Re: BPL Bad....Wireless GOOD said by Eat Me :
In other words, f**K everyone else, it's all about the money.
Proof BPL works:
[ /evening humor ] | |
| | | zentec
join:2002-01-05
Monroe, MI
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| It doesn't cost a damn dime to issue a press release telling the world what you'd like to do. Proof is in the pudding called profits.
Note that the 50 communities are NO WHERE NEAR the rural areas so proudly claimed to be served by the BPL camps.
Keep your eye on this one Mr. Sunbeam; and get yer ketchup ready for your crow dinner. | |
| | | warmpup
join:2004-07-24
Lehigh Valley, PA
edit:
July 25th, @10:05AM
| My local electric company PPL will be hooking me up to BPL on 8/05/04.
$39.95 a month for a BPL line which equals a T1 line in speed!
»www.pplbroadband.com
| |
| | Asmodeus7
join:2003-06-13
Houston, TX
| You are talking about the FCC here Mr. Your electronic equipment is supposed to meet certain interference standards. It wouldn't be a problem if manufacturers filtered their components so that they don't add line noise and block any line noise that could interrupt their operation. | |
| | warmpup
join:2004-07-24
Lehigh Valley, PA
| >>>As an amateur radio operator
Your first words said it LOUD and CLEAR. You have a built in bias against a NEW technology which MAY pose a slight, very slight interference issue on PAPER to YOUR God- given RIGHT to use a Ham Radio.
Pin Head Geek......cry baby.
BTW----FEMA and The FCC have NO problems with BPL and have given the OK for rollout on a wider scale. Now what's your problem? | |
| bernie123
Premium
join:2003-07-10
Selah, WA
|  BPL Will Fall Flat On It's Face!
 All you have to do is read the reports of massive radio interference it has and is causing in the test site's already running. Their is a report in almost every Mag., Journal or publication related to Radio, RF, Ham Radio, Shortwave listener's all over the country that have been used to listening, to broadcasts from the countries they came from . Can't Hear a Thing Anymore, if they are in a BPL Test Town. The static and background noise has Completely blocked reception of any over-sea's Shortwave listening. BPL in the end will Fail and the Power Company's will start bailing out as if it were a sinking ship. The Power Company's can't even keep control of the grid! Electricity is what they were built for, and all you have to do is think back how many time your Power has gone out in the last few years. | |
| | 
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Re: BPL Will Fall Flat On It's Face! If there's one state that big business will win - its Texas | |
| | | Sunburn
join:2000-10-05
Denver, CO
| Re: BPL Will Fall Flat On It's Face! The CONSUMER is going to WIN too. You have failed to connect those obvious dots for one reason or another...wether it be pure ignorance or an agenda not in line with the interests of consumers and broadband.
Blaming things on "EVIL" BIG business and hiding behind that banner is an extremely unsophisticated response that should only be reserved for paranoid schizophrenics and communist. | |
| | | | lujohnson
N 0 E Q P
join:2002-08-08
Agoura Hills, CA
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| Re: BPL Will Fall Flat On It's Face! OK, I see.... Everyone who doesn't agree with Sunburn's and Other's pro-BPL stance has an "Agenda" now, or is simply being "Pessimistic".
So my years of experience with electronics, RF propagation and interference, and my attempts to voice the facts that unfortunately shed negative light on BPL must then be "Propaganda" to you? How simplistic!
You could do yourself much better by going out and reading up on RF and Propagation. Then you might see that this is NOT some kind of conspiracy to keep you and others who desperately want and need Broadband from getting it!
I CAN speak with authority on these things, can you? | |
| | | |
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| said by Sunburn :
The CONSUMER is going to WIN too. You have failed to connect those obvious dots for one reason or another...wether it be pure ignorance or an agenda not in line with the interests of consumers and broadband.
Blaming things on "EVIL" BIG business and hiding behind that banner is an extremely unsophisticated response that should only be reserved for paranoid schizophrenics and communist.
I gave you a sophisticated response last time and you never came back with anything to support your position. You claimed there was no interference and because several of the systems couldn't get around transformers without bypasses, they couldn't be strong enough to interfere.
This isn't about "evil big business". I see business just acting the way it always does: do whatever is legal as long as it positively affects the bottom line. A sad fact of life is that few if any companies really care to be good corporate citizens or protect resources whether they be forests or radio spectrum, unless it will create or preserve revenue. Part 15 makes BPL legal, but it was never intended to support a national system of radiating conductors that pass every home. It was meant to accommodate the likes of baby monitors and garage door openers. If Part 15 would have been worded to take into account wideband 7x24 radiators, BPL wouldn't exist in the US and we wouldn't be having this conversation. But I digress.
You appear to equate BPL deployment with consumers winning, and that someone must lose (i.e. Hams). As we've said time and time again, but as you and others have chosen to ignore is that 90% of these affected frequencies are other services, such as federal frequencies. BPL companies could rally the FCC to implement the NTIA recommendations and also voluntarily limit power levels 70 dB or more below current FCC Part 15 limits. But instead we see statements opposing anything to make BPL halfway workable, and more head-in-the-sand statements that problems don't exist and BPL is the future.
I'm trying to understand your position and "connect the dots" as you say, but it seems to come down to the need for broadband supersedes everything else, regardless of the impact. You should read The Lorax »www.geekteacher.net/lorax.html by Dr. Suess. Substitute BPL for thneeds and radio spectrum for trufalla trees. I say this partially in jest, but not all things in life should be determined simply by consumer demand. | |
| | | | | | | | KB2PSM
join:2002-08-06
Long Beach, NY
edit:
July 19th, @09:55AM
| Sunburn,
you claim a position but argue against others by calling them pessimists, paranoid, communists, etc.
Your emotional and fact-devoid response to this particular form of technology is a poor argument for it.
It seems as if you are comfortable in discussing and reading about BPL with blinders on. Quite a few members here have taken the time to provide salient details about BPL and the problems with THIS form of broadband technology. You have yet to scientifically refute what was reported or even admit that you either read, accepted or considered them.
Again, with all of this emotion, you still lose sight of one thing- or at least will not admit the difference-
that RF engineers, radio operators, FEMA, NTIA, etc...are NOT and let me type that again in case it slipped by...NOT against broadband choices or that rural areas get competitive broadband services. I am sure that we can all agree that broadband access to ANYONE who wants it is a GOOD thing.
HOWEVER, BPL- one distinct proposal for the delivery of broadband over POWER LINES is what is being disputed and discredited here. Ham Radio Operators, etc...are not on the Broadband witch hunt that you need to position them as to propel your cause.
Why is it that when you read a press release from the Power Companies (that of course makes nice promises about the future), you throw it around as if it is the de-facto end of the argument and proven, yet will ignore, play down and discount the well-documented information to the contrary?
Those opposed to BPL (not Broadband !!!!) are naturally concerned with the technical data, which is strong enough that as a whole, they are not calling those who want BPL at any cost paranoid, communists, etc. in order to try to strengthen their position.
When one has the facts and history supporting them, they do not need to resort to the name calling and shouting matches in order to give the impression that their argument is just as strong or salient.
In the end, as politics and business goes (and this does not have to mean EVIL), BPL may be deployed- but not because it is the best or most promising solution. If you were truly interested, I am sure that some of the engineering savvy on this forum can give you examples of second rate or poorly executed technologies that won out over better ones because of politics or the big names attached to them. (Such as the TV standards that were embraced in this country, or the Tucker automobile that was squashed by GM, etc. because it was truly a better product).
All I ask is that you keep an open and honest mind.
You are the one that used terms like "pure ignorance" and "agenda". You might want to honestly revisit the use of these terms with regards to both sides of the argument here.
Be well- Rob | |
| | bernie123
Premium
join:2003-07-10
Selah, WA
|  I am for big Business the more competition of all sizes of Business we the consumer will be the winner. Look at Charter Cable for Example. I am getting 3178 Down/320-450 UP in a package with Digital TV for under $40 dollars a month.I just hate to see so much money poured down a empty hole while having the potential to wreak havoc on the Publics Owned Radio Spectrum. That's right the public not the Broadcast Station own the Air Waves and the FCC has turned into a political machine instead as the guardian for the people to protect those same air wave that send the fire truck or ambulance to your house when needed. We have all seen what happens to the Cell telephone system in a disaster add to it the inability of disaster serves to0 be able to talk to each other on a jammed BPL system or no system when the power goes out! When the Power goes out the good old Ma Bell Telephone and Radio take over. Our last line of defence. What would it have been like without radio in WWII. We need to listen to the experts reports of the tests not the Politian's that have dollars signs in their eyes. | |
| 
Luker3
@shentel.net
| I get it I had this crazy revelation. The idea is that the shortwave operaters keep their equipment so that when the "power" goes down then they can broadcast. If they are "trapped" then probably the power is down, means the BPL is down, then they can get safety. So they are really just limiting these people to use their equipment in an emergency.
Oh ya, how about they just fiber the US for half the cost of funding for new technologies over the next 10, because they aren't getting anything "better". | |
| | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: I get it said by Luker3:
I had this crazy revelation. The idea is that the shortwave operaters keep their equipment so that when the "power" goes down then they can broadcast. If they are "trapped" then probably the power is down, means the BPL is down, then they can get safety. So they are really just limiting these people to use their equipment in an emergency.
Again this tired old argument?
Doesn't matter if there is no BPL in your emergency area, but what about the place that has power and BPL interfering with communications? If you can't be heard, you won't be helped. | |
| Brisk
Qwest's Spirit Of Service Inaction
join:2003-07-11
Colorado Springs, CO
clubs: | 50-plus communities? I didn't know demand for broadband from seniors was so high.  | |
| | 
snorpus
join:2000-10-02
Export, PA | Re: 50-plus communities?
Us old-timers need broadband more, since we have less time remaining. | |
| w2co
join:2003-07-16
Longmont, CO
| Here we go again Well folks here we go again with another round of mis-informed comments about a doomed technology. It's so easy for politicians and lawyers to fool wireless illiterate people into thinking this technology is feasable. And sure they say it will be cheaper than other broadband technologies, thats because it truely is inferior to the others in both speed and reliability and they know it. But do you think they will tell this to the population in that area of Texas? Heck most down there can't even read or write their own names. How much money are they going to waste until they realize it just aint gonna work? | |
| 
WillHaeck
join:2002-01-20
Monroe, WA
| Foolish technology. Someone high up needs to catch the idea that this technology has nothing going for it and everything going against it. This is coming from a 56ker who would like nothing more than to get broadband, but the fact is I know BPL isn't a technology of the future, it causes far to much trouble, its too slow and its not exceptionally cheap to deploy. For the plus sides, well it has backers way high up. This technology needs to die and then the FCC needs to realize the best way to solve any problems with broadband is the strongly encourage fiber to be laid EVERYWHERE. It should be similar to how power and phone lines were gotten everywhere, cause the sooner the country is wired with fiber the sooner we can stop worrying about broadband. | |
| | w2co
join:2003-07-16
Longmont, CO
|  Re: Foolish technology.
| |
| | | RFJock
join:2004-01-13
Norfolk, VA
| Re: Foolish technology. Another Amen, brother. It was with great pleasure that I noted on eHam the announcement that Verizon is planning Fiber to the Premises rollouts in CA, FL and, get this TEXAS!
Better yet, the lowest level rates being floated around are about $35-40 for 5Mb down/2Mb up service! Contrast that with the Central Virginia Electric Co-op (who are doing one of the first truly rural tests with Ambient equipment) are publicizing ~30.00 for 256 down/128 up via BPL (I think this is about the most honest estimate of the REAL speed with BPL that I have seen yet). I truly believe that when CVEC sees the capital outlay to light up 500 miles of line in ONE substation sector, that they will end the trial very quickly.
For those of you intersested, 500 miles of line will require something on the order of 800 plus pieces of injector/extractor/repeater equipment to "light up". That is just ONE substation sector in a rural area. And you think that will have any kind of ROI? Even if they got 500 subscribers (unlikely), it would take more than the lifetime of the equipment to return the capital investment, unless a piece of the capital will be paid by the electric rate-payers, and I don't know many folks (me included) that would sit still for that!
I have done my bit commenting on BPL and now I shall simply sit back and watch as the desparate-to-escape "expert entreprenuers and businessmen" twist in the breeze and lose their shorts. Told you so, over and over and over again. Facts speak louder than press releases. | |
| | | | warmpup
join:2004-07-24
Lehigh Valley, PA
| Re: Foolish technology. Well.....you're just another Ham Radio fanboy.
Please get your FACTS straight on BPL.
FEMA and The FCC are 100% behind BPL.
So please go cry in a corner.
Btw---Your cost model is way off too. 1) BPL is now mainly for the city folks where the phone and cable companies have slacked off and ignored a large portion of puter users. 2) After BPL lights the fire under DSL and Cable the rural areas will have three choices for Broadband but most subscribers will opt for BPL for its price($39.95/month), speed(T1 line speed) and ease of use--walk out to the yard(up to 750ft). | |
| | | | | RFJock
join:2004-01-13
Norfolk, VA
| Re: Foolish technology. My cost model, as you put it, refers to a specific test deployment in rural Nelson County, Virginia. It is based on the PUBLISHED stats on the particular substation sector being "lit up". It is very simple math and really not that hard to grasp. My point is, once this power co-op (and it's members) realize the amount of investment involved and the returns they are getting, they will dump it, fast. In case you are not familiar with rural electric co-ops, each customer is also a voting member who has a say in the financial decisions made by management. They (we, I am in one) have a vested financial interest in how our money is spent (or wasted).
>>1) BPL is now mainly for the city folks...
And always will be. It is the only environment that BPL has a prayer of showing any profit, and profit is what it is all about.
>>2) After BPL lights the fire under DSL and Cable the rural areas will have three choices...
BPL will NEVER be the motivator to bring broadband to the rural masses. We will continue to be ignored for the very same reasons DSL and Cable providers ignore rural customers. There is no money to be made. You can bet your bottom dollar that providers will NOT eat capital to bring broadband to rural America out of the goodness of their hearts. WiMAX and fiber are the only technologies that could even come close to raising the hair on the back of a Cable or DSL Exec's neck.
If you wish to call me a "Ham Radio fanboy", fine, I've been called much worse. For the record, I am a Ham, Extra class. I live in a very rural area where I desparately wish I had broadband service at a reasonable price. My local FD and Sheriffs offices use radio equipment in the very same spectrum as BPL and I am not interested in having their ability to receive dispatch calls sacrificed for the sake of my broadband.
When the county declares a state of emergency, guess who staffs the backup comms at the EOC... and if my public service makes me a Ham Radio fanboy, so be it. | |
| | | | | | RFJock
join:2004-01-13
Norfolk, VA
| Re: Foolish technology. And one other thought:
True, FCC is behind BPL. FEMA and NTIA are not "100%". Both these organizations led off with NPRM comments highly critical of BPL. They were then leaned on by the Administration because King George came out publicly in favor of BPL on bad advice. And so these agencies issued subsequent, very carefully worded "clarifications" of their initial filings. Carefully worded to provide them an out, while appearing to support the President. Read the filings in ET Docket 04-37, they are quite revealing.
No component of this administration is going to go against a public statement by the incumbent President in an elecion year. That does not make BPL a good idea. It means we get yet another bad idea dumped on us just to cover a bad call by the President. SOP these days. | |
| | | | warmpup
join:2004-07-24
Lehigh Valley, PA
| Well.....you're just another Ham Radio fanboy.
Please get your FACTS straight on BPL.
FEMA and The FCC are 100% behind BPL.
So please go cry in a corner.
Btw---Your cost model is way off too. 1) BPL is now mainly for the city folks where the phone and cable companies have slacked off and ignored a large portion of computer users. 2) After BPL lights the fire under DSL and Cable the rural areas will have three choices for Broadband but most subscribers will opt for BPL for its price($39.95/month), speed(T1 line speed) and ease of use--walk out to the yard(up to 750ft). | |
| | | | | RFJock
join:2004-01-13
Norfolk, VA
| Re: Foolish technology. One more thing, warmpup. Please please post and let us know how the service works out. Yes, I am personally not in favor of BPL, but that does not mean that I would deny your use of it. We all would be very interested in hearing a first hand account of the service from someone actually using it and not hype and press releases. A truly objective eval of the service would be a real breath of fresh air. How is the speed? As promised? Do you note alot of packet loss? Remember that BPL is a Part 15 service and hence must accept all interference from all sources including power line noise. I am NOT suggesting that anyone would try to intentionally interfere with the service, but I would be interested to know your experience in the real world. Ingress will typically show up as packet loss. Good luck with the service and let us know what you think. | |
| | | |
|
|
New Texas BPL Trials
·
·
