White Space Broadband: Back To The Drawing BoardFCC reports that devices, in their current form, don't play nice ( old news - 10:50AM Friday Aug 03 2007) tags: competition · fcc · business · wirelessA six-partner coalition (including Microsoft, Google and Dell) wants to use the so-called "white space" spectrum -- partially freed by the migration to digital television -- to offer consumers cheap broadband via the airwaves. The problem is there's an immense potential for interference with existing systems, and available spectrum could be too limited (particularly in urban markets) to really compete with incumbent offerings. The companies submitted white space devices to the FCC for testing last spring, claiming that the device could auto-detect nearby frequencies and avoid problems. The results are in from the FCC Office of Engineering and Technology. In the technology's current form, it won't work: After four months of testing, the agency concluded that the devices either interfered with TV signals or could not detect them in order to skirt them (emphasis added). Now the coalition of companies backing the devices, which includes Dell, Intel, EarthLink, Hewlett-Packard and Philips, is going back to the drawing board, possibly to redesign the devices and meet with FCC engineers to explore other options. Links to the FCC public notice, prototype device report, appendices and direct pickup report -- all in pdf format.
Related:- 700 MHz Auction Inches towards $20 Billion
- Verizon Nabs Most Valuable 700Mhz Spectrum
- So Much For The Talk of Open Wireless Networks
- 700Mhz Auction Winners Finally Talking
- Anti-Competition Concerns Ignite Spectrum Cap Debate
- Cyren Call Asks Rural Providers to Bid on D-Block
- FCC Proceeds Cautiously With White Space Testing
- Google Launches White Space Broadband Website
|
 
pinot noir
Premium
join:2007-04-23
Columbus, OH | Interference Problem I guess I wouldn't be any too happy if my neighbor's internet connection (or my own) was interfering with my TV show. | |
|  | 8744675
join:2000-10-10
Decatur, GA | Re: Interference Problem "...the agency concluded that the devices either interfered with TV signals or could not detect them in order to skirt them (emphasis added)."
This is by design, cried Microsoft! | |
| | | | RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
 ·XMission
| This technology could interfere with certain other corporate plans.....
I like how when a possible interfering technology comes along it is shot down with detailed studies, but when another interfering technology (BPL) comes along, it is ok.
Not that there are not potential problems with this, the frequencies looked at appear to be in the areas of 54-72 MHz, 76-88 MHz, 174-216 MHz, and 470-698 MHz. Now in about 4 years or so, 54-72 MHz, 76-88 MHz and maybe 174-216 MHz will be going a heck of lot farther than line of sight. Even in today's propagation doldrums I used 50 MHz to talk from the Salt Lake City, Utah area to Seattle, Washington area (and I was only using 50 watts and a 9 foot high dipole). And I have seen reports of 144 MHz doing about the same distances recently back in the crowded east coast areas, although it is much rarer now than it will be. And around 1980, we had our portable/mobile line of sight 48-56 MHz communications wiped out in the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento River Delta area because of skip from units operating in VIRGINIA!
While I am skeptical of the FCC's testing rationale, the technical aspect may be valid.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. | |
| | 
Heterman
Premium
join:2004-02-28
Fayetteville, AR | Re: This technology could interfere I can see it now. The "new" skip shooting. Erecting 802.1x beams and directional yagis, attaching to a wireless access point hundreds to thousands of miles away. | |
| | | 
TScheisskopf
World News Trust
join:2005-02-13
Belvidere, NJ | Re: This technology could interfere Imagine the fun with Yagis and Log periodics, temperature inversions and meteorite scatter.  | |
| | 
N3OGH
They both suck, we're so screwed
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs | Dude, that 6 meter band can do some wacky stuff..
Back in the old regular TV days, 6 meters was the SCOURGE of the rabbit eared...
--
Welcome to cat noise Wednsday!! | |
| | | RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
·XMission
| Re: This technology could interfere said by N3OGH  :Dude, that 6 meter band can do some wacky stuff.. Back in the old regular TV days, 6 meters was the SCOURGE of the rabbit eared... Yes TVs were not very well designed and some still are not. But I was not using 6 meters in the 80's, I was military using military freqs.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. | |
| | | |
N3OGH
They both suck, we're so screwed
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs | Re: This technology could interfere Gotcha.... | |
| | | | 
CyberRage
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-21
Jasper, AL
| said by RayW :said by N3OGH :Dude, that 6 meter band can do some wacky stuff.. Back in the old regular TV days, 6 meters was the SCOURGE of the rabbit eared... Yes TVs were not very well designed and some still are not. But I was not using 6 meters in the 80's, I was military using military freqs. Yep, TV's used to hava a 50 MHz IF. Didn't go well with 6 meters or anything close to the lower edge of the band.
--
Prop your feet up at Southeast Chat | |
| | | | | RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
·XMission
| Re: This technology could interfere said by CyberRage :said by RayW :said by N3OGH :Dude, that 6 meter band can do some wacky stuff.. Back in the old regular TV days, 6 meters was the SCOURGE of the rabbit eared... Yes TVs were not very well designed and some still are not. But I was not using 6 meters in the 80's, I was military using military freqs. Yep, TV's used to hava a 50 MHz IF. Didn't go well with 6 meters or anything close to the lower edge of the band. Yes, but if they were correctly designed it would not matter. But that is an argument that has been going on as long as there has been people on two different frequencies.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. | |
| 
verizonnet
@rr.com | Maybe The FCC Fudged The Test I don't think competent engineers would submit a bogus design for final approval. We already know the FCC is full of shit! | |
| | 
John Galt
Spricket24
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Oceanside, OR
| Re: Maybe The FCC Fudged The Test said by verizonnet :
I don't think competent engineers would submit a bogus design for final approval. We already know the FCC is full of shit!
Designs get rejected all of the time. They go back to the drawing board and tweak.
The process is reiterative.
--
A is A | |
| 
Paladin
Sage of the light
join:2001-08-17
Chester, IL | Good luck getting this done Providing a great Internet access network can enable wireless VoIP, which would eat the cell providers' lunch. Ain't happening. | |
| | | |
|
|
FCC doing what it should be doing ....
·
