dslreports logo
 story category
Dolly Parton Hates White Space Broadband
NAB spares no expense in last ditch effort to kill White Space vote...

If you cover the tech industry, your inbox has probably been assaulted over the last week with press releases from the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB), who are unleashing the power of their lobbying apparatus upon Washington and the press in the hopes of derailing a November 4 vote on White Space broadband. White Space broadband would use unlicensed and partially vacated spectrum created by the shift to digital television to create a new broadband delivery system. FCC engineers recently ruled that if designed correctly, white space broadband is plausible and devices should be able to avoid nearby spectrum. Difficult as hell, but plausible.

Click for full size
While there is a mountain of technical concerns to fix and interference worries to address, NAB and incumbent ISPs are worried about the additional broadband and broadcast competitive impact of an entirely new delivery pipe to the home. White Space broadband has been under consideration for 4.5 years, with 30,000 comments received by the FCC. NAB's final fight is a day late and a dollar short, but they certainly are trying hard. Good lobbying efforts frequently hijack existing minority, disability or any other group that needs funding to parrot their political positions so support (or in this case opposition) to an idea seems more intense than it really is.

In NAB's case, they've spent the last few weeks enlisting the help of everyone from the politicians they pay to super-churches, all of whom have been bombarding the media with what's essentially just NAB press releases. Most entertaining however, was this week's use of Dolly Parton to oppose White Space broadband, despite the fact her letter (packed with the same NAB talking points used by hundreds of other suddenly "concerned" groups and individuals) makes clear she had never even heard of it until NAB came calling:

quote:
I don't know all the legalese concerning the issue so I've had some very smart people inform me about the legalities here . . . I have deep concern over the Commission's announcement that it intends to vote on an order allowing devices using spectrum sensing technoogy to occupy the "white space" radio frequencies on November 4, 2008.
Google, Microsoft, Dell, and other members of the Wireless Innovation Alliance have also been lobbying the FCC hard to keep the vote on track. Bill Gates himself this week applied pressure to the FCC, though apparently Microsoft would have better luck recruiting the help of Minnie Pearl.

So far, the FCC doesn't appear to be bending to the pressure of the NAB (and Dolly) public relations assault. While most engineers we've spoken to in the industry do admit that White Space will be tricky to implement (the initial low power of devices in particular may hamper usefulness) most agree that after half a decade of debating the idea that it's time to at least give it a shot. And while NAB, Dolly Parton, people paid by phone companies to hate Google and the Tuskegee, Alabama boys choir may all oppose White Space broadband (while strangely reading from the same script) -- most consumer advocates and many engineers think it's time to start tinkering.

Maybe White Space broadband will be little more than the next BPL -- or maybe it could be something more.
view:
topics flat nest 

Zonerider
Zonerider
Premium Member
join:2004-12-01
united kingd

3 edits

Zonerider

Premium Member

possibly for fixed wireless

But if used for mobile it may well cause interference.

Jeff
Connoisseur of leisurely things
Premium Member
join:2002-12-24
GMT -5

Jeff

Premium Member

That's who they got?

That's like someone picking Sarah Pali...err, nevermind. (C'mon, people. It's a joke.) I'm now putting up the countdown clock for whoever starts the mini thread on the obvious issue related to this story.

inteller
Sociopaths always win.
join:2003-12-08
Tulsa, OK

1 recommendation

inteller

Member

oh you just wanted an excuse

to show dolly's big boobs.
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD

2 recommendations

nasadude

Member

Re: oh you just wanted an excuse

and we thank you for that.

Jeff
Connoisseur of leisurely things
Premium Member
join:2002-12-24
GMT -5

Jeff to inteller

Premium Member

to inteller
said by inteller:

to show dolly's big boobs.
And a winner!

Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY

Transmaster

Member

Re: oh you just wanted an excuse

You don't suppose Dolly objects to the Broad in Broadband.
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD

nasadude

Member

support from scofflaws?

it's funny how the NAB is enlisting the support of all the groups that illegally use unlicensed wireless mics.

of course the people using wireless mics don't pose a threat to NAB's business like widespread, affordable broadband would.

ArrayList
DevOps
Premium Member
join:2005-03-19
Mullica Hill, NJ

1 recommendation

ArrayList

Premium Member

Re: support from scofflaws?

said by nasadude:

...widespread, affordable broadband...
what? you have to be kidding...

ropeguru
Premium Member
join:2001-01-25
Mechanicsville, VA

ropeguru

Premium Member

Re: support from scofflaws?

said by ArrayList:

said by nasadude:

...widespread, affordable broadband...
what? you have to be kidding...
Not at all... Once Obama is elected, taxes will go up so he can redistribute wealth bring broadband to all.

ArrayList
DevOps
Premium Member
join:2005-03-19
Mullica Hill, NJ

1 edit

ArrayList

Premium Member

Re: support from scofflaws?

said by ropeguru:

said by ArrayList:

said by nasadude:

...widespread, affordable broadband...
what? you have to be kidding...
Not at all... Once Obama is elected, taxes will go up so he can redistribute wealth bring broadband to all.
considering that I don't pay income taxes(disabled vet pulling disability while I go to school on the post 9/11 GI bill »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Po ··· _of_2008) i dont give a rats ass about raising taxes. so if thats what it takes to get more competition in the broadband markets then by all means bring it on!

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5

Premium Member

Re: support from scofflaws?

said by ArrayList:

considering that I don't pay income taxes(disabled vet pulling disability while I go to school on the post 9/11 GI bill »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Po ··· _of_2008) i dont give a rats ass about raising taxes. so if thats what it takes to get more competition in the broadband markets then by all means bring it on!
You might someday if you ever end up working and paying taxes.
callihn
join:2008-10-24

1 edit

1 recommendation

callihn to ArrayList

Member

to ArrayList
said by ArrayList:

considering that I don't pay income taxes(disabled vet pulling disability while I go to school on the post 9/11 GI bill »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Po ··· _of_2008) i dont give a rats ass about raising taxes. so if thats what it takes to get more competition in the broadband markets then by all means bring it on!
Interesting, I was thinking that instead of raising taxes we could just make some of these sorry, so called disabled people and some of these lazy adults hiding in school ( that don't know how to use apostrophes ) get out and go to work and contribute to society, instead of just sitting around sucking it dry, then we wouldn't have to ever raise taxes. Since I'm neither I think that would be a grand solution!
fiberguy2
My views are my own.
Premium Member
join:2005-05-20

fiberguy2

Premium Member

Re: support from scofflaws?

Watch what you say about "so called" disabled people especially in responding to a post from a self described disabled vet. For what ever reason he's a DV, they pay a lot more than any tax can do by serving in the military.. which by the way, has protected your rights to spout off like an ass as you did. Served in the military have you? (Please don't answer yes.. I already know the answer because you wouldn't have posted such trash even though I DO agree on you with point about lazy adults.)

And mods, trust me, I'm being VERY nice on this one and biting my tongue as a Iraq War 1 vet.

ArrayList
DevOps
Premium Member
join:2005-03-19
Mullica Hill, NJ

ArrayList

Premium Member

Re: support from scofflaws?

thanks for the post brother.
ArrayList

1 recommendation

ArrayList to callihn

Premium Member

to callihn
said by callihn:

said by ArrayList:

considering that I don't pay income taxes(disabled vet pulling disability while I go to school on the post 9/11 GI bill »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Po ··· _of_2008) i dont give a rats ass about raising taxes. so if thats what it takes to get more competition in the broadband markets then by all means bring it on!
Interesting, I was thinking that instead of raising taxes we could just make some of these sorry, so called disabled people and some of these lazy adults hiding in school ( that don't know how to use apostrophes ) get out and go to work and contribute to society, instead of just sitting around sucking it dry, then we wouldn't have to ever raise taxes. Since I'm neither I think that would be a grand solution!
i would've thought that serving 8 years in the military with 6 of them being deployed I'd deserve some time off. forgive me for not going right into blue collar work. I kind of want to get into the white collar field myself(hence the college). I will be working. someday. If more people went to college, served, either public office or military, and then went to work we'd have a far more intelligent workforce, probably even more technically skilled.

Giving someone a hard time for going to college is such a bastardly thing to do.
Expand your moderator at work

NetAdmin1
CCNA
join:2008-05-22

2 edits

NetAdmin1 to ropeguru

Member

to ropeguru
said by ropeguru:

Not at all... Once Obama is elected, taxes will go up so he can redistribute wealth bring broadband to all.
At least one of the candidates is being somewhat honest about the fact that his programs cost money and that to pay for them, he will have to raise taxes on the people who dodge most of their taxes anyway. McCain will just continue the last eight years of driving the government further into debt, as evidenced by the way he talks about his budget.

Just a side note, both of the candidates suck, so don't mistake me for Obama supporter.

ropeguru
Premium Member
join:2001-01-25
Mechanicsville, VA

1 edit

1 recommendation

ropeguru

Premium Member

Re: support from scofflaws?

said by NetAdmin1:

said by ropeguru:

Not at all... Once Obama is elected, taxes will go up so he can redistribute wealth bring broadband to all.
At least one of the candidates is being somewhat honest about the fact that his programs cost money and that to pay for them, he will have to raise taxes on the people who dodge most of their taxes anyway. McCain will just continue the last eight years of driving the government further into debt, as evidenced by the way he talks about his budget.
But the fact of the matter is that it will be raise don those that hire people to work for them. When this happens, it will just force more companies to downsize and move overseas which will kill the economy even more.
said by NetAdmin1:

Just a side note, both of the candidates suck, so don't mistake me for Obama supporter.
Afraid I have to agree with you there. Can't we just vote none of the above and start over?

NetAdmin1
CCNA
join:2008-05-22

NetAdmin1

Member

Re: support from scofflaws?

said by ropeguru:

But the fact of the matter is that it will be raise don those that hire people to work for them. When this happens, it will just force more companies to downsize and move overseas which will kill the economy even more.
I have heard that claim made many times - that raising the tax rates on the PERSONAL incomes of CEOs, other overpaid execs and people with high incomes would result force companies to downsize - but have yet to see anyone prove that higher tax rates on PERSONAL income and unemployment rates are linked. I would believe high corporate tax rates might affect employment numbers, but not taxes on personal income.

ropeguru
Premium Member
join:2001-01-25
Mechanicsville, VA

1 edit

ropeguru

Premium Member

Re: support from scofflaws?

said by NetAdmin1:

said by ropeguru:

But the fact of the matter is that it will be raise don those that hire people to work for them. When this happens, it will just force more companies to downsize and move overseas which will kill the economy even more.
I have heard that claim made many times - that raising the tax rates on the PERSONAL incomes of CEOs, other overpaid execs and people with high incomes would result force companies to downsize - but have yet to see anyone prove that higher tax rates on PERSONAL income and unemployment rates are linked. I would believe high corporate tax rates might affect employment numbers, but not taxes on personal income.
I wasn't talking only about personal incomes. He stands to raise taxes and put other burdens directly on businesses too. That is where the issue will be in forcing them overseas.

knightmb
Everybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN

knightmb

Member

Re: support from scofflaws?

said by ropeguru:

I wasn't talking only about personal incomes. He stands to raise taxes and put other burdens directly on businesses too. That is where the issue will be in forcing them overseas.
Spin on words, you forgot that the raise on taxes for business can be offset by keeping jobs here, good health insurance for employees, and many other tax breaks/perks for the business that would be in the same tax plan, etc. All of which their Accountant/Tax CPA will know about and certainly use come tax time. You should really read in depth of what both candidates want to do because you are just taking one part "he's going to raise taxes" and applying the chicken little sky falling effect to it.

funchords
Hello
MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA

1 recommendation

funchords to ropeguru

MVM

to ropeguru
TOPIC: Dolly Parton Hates White Space Broadband
chriskern
Premium Member
join:2007-10-19
Hudson, FL

1 edit

chriskern to ropeguru

Premium Member

to ropeguru
Want some cheese with that WHINE!!!!!
clickie8
join:2005-05-22
Monroe, MI

clickie8 to ropeguru

Member

to ropeguru
As opposed to the system now of redistributing wealth from people yet unborn to people living now.

That's exactly why deficits matter.

You're naive if you think your taxes are not going up; there's trillions of dollars to be paid back. Where do you think the money is going to come from? You, that's who. They'll get it two ways by either taxing you directly, or inflating the money supply and stealth taxing you through inflation.
chriskern
Premium Member
join:2007-10-19
Hudson, FL

chriskern

Premium Member

Re: support from scofflaws?

BINGO!!!!! Give that man a CIGAR!!!!!
88615298 (banned)
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

88615298 (banned) to ropeguru

Member

to ropeguru
said by ropeguru:

said by ArrayList:

said by nasadude:

...widespread, affordable broadband...
what? you have to be kidding...
Not at all... Once Obama is elected, taxes will go up so he can redistribute wealth bring broadband to all.
Unlike McCain right? I mean in order to give people too "poor" to get their own health insurance a $5000 government check for health insurance he's going to tax the insurance premiums of those that currently get their insurance through their job. Not only is that redistributing wealth it's also a tax hike on WORKING Americans. But go ahead and bash Obama.

ropeguru
Premium Member
join:2001-01-25
Mechanicsville, VA

ropeguru

Premium Member

Re: support from scofflaws?

said by 88615298:

But go ahead and bash Obama.
Thank you. I will exercise my First Amendment right.

knightmb
Everybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN

knightmb

Member

Re: support from scofflaws?

Me too with my Icon.
88615298 (banned)
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

1 edit

88615298 (banned) to ropeguru

Member

to ropeguru
said by ropeguru:

said by 88615298:

But go ahead and bash Obama.
Thank you. I will exercise my First Amendment right.
Your right to be ignorant of the facts. I'm not even an Obama supporter, but if you insist calling out Obama you better look at YOUR candidate because he isn't any different despite WTF he says. George Bush Sr said in 1988 "read my lips, no new taxes" them promptly raised them anyways. So sorry if I take McCain's BS with a grain of salt.

ropeguru
Premium Member
join:2001-01-25
Mechanicsville, VA

ropeguru

Premium Member

Re: support from scofflaws?

said by 88615298:

said by ropeguru:

said by 88615298:

But go ahead and bash Obama.
Thank you. I will exercise my First Amendment right.
Your right to be ignorant of the facts. I'm not even an Obama supporter, but if you insist calling out Obama you better look at YOUR candidate because he isn't any different despite WTF he says. George Bush Sr said in 1988 "read my lips, no new taxes" them promptly raised them anyways. So sorry if I take McCain's BS with a grain of salt.
That is why Obama is letting all the current tax cuts Bush put in place expire. So I guess some are right as he will not be raising taxes. Another spin on words WhooHoo!!!

knightmb
Everybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN

knightmb to ropeguru

Member

to ropeguru
said by ropeguru:
said by ArrayList:
said by nasadude:

...widespread, affordable broadband...
what? you have to be kidding...
Not at all... Once Obama is elected, taxes will go up so he can redistribute wealth bring broadband to all.
Ha, taken right from the Republican spin machine, well copied/pasted

Republican tax plan would make more sense if they also included a top level tax CPA for free that would do your taxes every year. Somehow I don't think top companies or private business that make enough to be affected are really worried about the tax increase that much.
88615298 (banned)
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

1 recommendation

88615298 (banned)

Member

Re: support from scofflaws?

said by knightmb:

Ha, taken right from the Republican spin machine, well copied/pasted

Republican tax plan would make more sense if they also included a top level tax CPA for free that would do your taxes every year. Somehow I don't think top companies or private business that make enough to be affected are really worried about the tax increase that much.
Obama = tax and spend
McCain = borrow from China with interest and spend.
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD

nasadude to ArrayList

Member

to ArrayList
said by ArrayList:

said by nasadude:

...widespread, affordable broadband...
what? you have to be kidding...
naw, just dreaming.
clickie8
join:2005-05-22
Monroe, MI

clickie8 to nasadude

Member

to nasadude
They are not illegal. These are Part-15 devices and require no licensing.

MrMoody
Free range slave
Premium Member
join:2002-09-03
Smithfield, NC
Netgear CM500
Asus RT-AC68

MrMoody

Premium Member

Re: support from scofflaws?

said by clickie8:

They are not illegal. These are Part-15 devices and require no licensing.
Incorrect. Part 15 specifically excludes the TV bands. Microphones in the TV bands technically require a license, which the FCC has not been enforcing because no one complains.

Their very narrow bandwidth signal, low power, the facts that (up until DTV) it was easy to set them to an unused channel and they aren't generally used in residential areas, all mean TV interference was minimal.

None of this is true of WSDs except the low power (until the WSD is hacked, amplified or connected to a high-gain antenna).

funchords
Hello
MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA

funchords to clickie8

MVM

to clickie8
said by clickie8:

They are not illegal. These are Part-15 devices and require no licensing.
Clickie, these conflicting mics aren't the Part 15 wireless mics. These are the ones lower in the spectrum that do require licenses -- and some operators do have them, but many do not.

MrMoody
Free range slave
Premium Member
join:2002-09-03
Smithfield, NC
Netgear CM500
Asus RT-AC68

MrMoody to nasadude

Premium Member

to nasadude
said by nasadude:

of course the people using wireless mics don't pose a threat to NAB's business like widespread, affordable broadband would.
How does broadband compete with the NAB members' FREE, AD-SUPPORTED service? They are genuinely concerned with interference and loss of spectrum, and with good reason.

As far as widespread, affordable broadband goes, this will only be it if you define broadband as wireless dialup. At best it will be a much larger area version of an open WiFi point on a university campus. It will have thousands of users crowded onto a few dozen Mb of available bandwidth. At worst, it will be another overcrowded WiFi with more range (bad), with everyone using it to try to create private links to their office, their buddy's house, etc.

And if the cheap devices don't interfere right out of the box (likely), hackers will see to it that they do by using high-gain antennas, boosting power and forcing operation on interfering channels.

WiMAX is far better, capable of serving broadband to all users and can serve the same purpose WSDs supposedly will.

WSDs have too much likelihood of causing unsolvable problems; we CANNOT allow them.

funchords
Hello
MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA

funchords

MVM

Re: support from scofflaws?

said by MrMoody:
said by nasadude:

of course the people using wireless mics don't pose a threat to NAB's business like widespread, affordable broadband would.
How does broadband compete with the NAB members' FREE, AD-SUPPORTED service?
If you don't think that the Internet competes with broadcast TV for time and attention, then you're starting the game hopelessly lost.
said by MrMoody:

They are genuinely concerned with interference and loss of spectrum, and with good reason.
?
said by MrMoody:

As far as widespread, affordable broadband goes, this will only be it if you define broadband as wireless dialup. At best it will be a much larger area version of an open WiFi point on a university campus. It will have thousands of users crowded onto a few dozen Mb of available bandwidth. At worst, it will be another overcrowded WiFi with more range (bad), with everyone using it to try to create private links to their office, their buddy's house, etc.
At worst. At best it works great!
said by MrMoody:

And if the cheap devices don't interfere right out of the box (likely), hackers will see to it that they do by using high-gain antennas, boosting power and forcing operation on interfering channels.
I can't say this won't happen sometimes, but by and large people will buy a cheap device and it will either work or not work. Only a teenie-tiny portion have the knowledge or desire to spend significant time and effort on it.
said by MrMoody:

WiMAX is far better, capable of serving broadband to all users and can serve the same purpose WSDs supposedly will.
This is not a choice between WiMAX and WSD.
said by MrMoody:

WSDs have too much likelihood of causing unsolvable problems; we CANNOT allow them.
Sure we can. We allowed cordless phones, and they generally worked. They even worked in several different modes. They even worked even though hackers could modify them.

You're spreading worry.

MrMoody
Free range slave
Premium Member
join:2002-09-03
Smithfield, NC
Netgear CM500
Asus RT-AC68

MrMoody

Premium Member

Re: support from scofflaws?

said by funchords:

If you don't think that the Internet competes with broadcast TV for time and attention, then you're starting the game hopelessly lost.
You can't seriously think that a new wireless internet is going to take many eyes away from broadcast that aren't already on the internet some other way.
At worst. At best it works great!
There's no way it CAN "work great," it's physically impossible. It's a poorly thought out model being rammed through by companies who think they can make a killing with wide-area hotspots (maybe) and PAY portable wireless service (definitely). It doesn't have enough bandwidth available to serve the area it would cover with any reasonable broadband.
I can't say this won't happen sometimes, but by and large people will buy a cheap device and it will either work or not work. Only a teenie-tiny portion have the knowledge or desire to spend significant time and effort on it.
It only takes 1 guy in the right spot to cause a problem for someone else, a problem they shouldn't by all rights have to have, and with DTV won't even likely suspect the source of his trouble.

How many cantennas do you think are out there being used to steal WiFi? And they had to build that antenna, with WSD they will be able to walk into Radio Shack and buy a $40 yagi. It also only takes 1 hacker to hack the firmware and release it, then every pirate wannabe on the internet has it with NO effort.
This is not a choice between WiMAX and WSD.
Says you. They both will provide the same service (or so the WIA claims: this is a lie of course), but WiMAX can do it much better without destroying free TV.
Sure we can. We allowed cordless phones, and they generally worked. They even worked in several different modes. They even worked even though hackers could modify them.
Cordless phones are much harder to hack than a computer network device (hardware vs soft/firmware), they aren't operating in the TV bands and there's not much incentive for anyone to boost the signal. Apples to oranges. WiFi already runs in some of the cordless phone bands. WiFi is hacked routinely. Luckily (or rather due to existing rules putting them where they are in the spectrum), they don't cause problems with other services, only each other.
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22

amigo_boy to nasadude

Member

to nasadude
said by nasadude:

it's funny how the NAB is enlisting the support of all the groups that illegally use unlicensed wireless mics.
What I think is funny is that it's supposed to be persuasive that a small, niche use should stand in the way of widespread public benefit.

I understand it's subject to debate whether whitespace broadband will be widespread. But, the potential is that it could benefit every household. That's hard to compare to a relative handful of people with a special use.

Mark

xyar
Premium Member
join:2001-06-21
Portland, OR

xyar to nasadude

Premium Member

to nasadude
Every professional wireless microphone system I've seen is at or below the FCC limit for unlicensed broadcasting, which in that case I think is 50 mW. They're completely legal unless someone has jacked up the output above the manufactured threshold.

funchords
Hello
MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA

funchords

MVM

Re: support from scofflaws?

Unless you're in 49 MHz or 900 MHz or 2.4 GHz, you are required to have a license. That's a big part of this flap up is the wide belief that you don't need one (about a thousand have been issued).
A couple of stories .... »www.usatoday.com/news/wa ··· 43_x.htm »arstechnica.com/news.ars ··· use.html

jjoshua
Premium Member
join:2001-06-01
Scotch Plains, NJ

jjoshua

Premium Member

So if...

If I say that I don't particularly care for Dolly Parton, does that make everything even.
cornelius785
join:2006-10-26
Worcester, MA

cornelius785

Member

so apparently when money doesn't get the job done...

just find the nearest sex toy (or celebrity, bonus if they are both) to seduce the politicians and other government officials to get them to vote the way you want? it is actually pretty scary how much extensive a celebrities influence can be. is a wrestler qualified to be a politician? how about a former actor/body builder?
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD

nasadude

Member

Re: so apparently when money doesn't get the job done...

and if that doesn't work, the next step is to say white spaces broadband will spread child pornography - that should stop WSD in it's tracks

Lortab jones
@verizon.net

Lortab jones

Anon

Mic Douglas

Tell me more of these unlicensed wireless mics. I am unaware of the issue, but I always enjoy hearing of fresh contention.

NetAdmin1
CCNA
join:2008-05-22

NetAdmin1

Member

Nice choice of spokesperson

I have to say, choosing Dolly Parton to talk about whitespace broadband is like picking Brittany Spears to warn people about the "dangers" of the LHC. Neither of them know anything about either issue, but of course clueless people everyone are going to take them seriously because they are famous.

••••
VariableARK
join:2003-03-17
USA

VariableARK

Member

Competition is Dead

The only people who are going to be able to afford to a big wireless role out like this are going to be the big guys anyways. This isn't going to increase competition at all just give ATT and the like another avenue to deliver service.

corrector
@salibaco.com

1 recommendation

corrector

Anon

that's not a picture of Dolly

that's an dolly impersonator. cripes.

MrMoody
Free range slave
Premium Member
join:2002-09-03
Smithfield, NC

MrMoody

Premium Member

Re: that's not a picture of Dolly

LOL, good spot.

sempergoofy
Premium Member
join:2001-07-06
Smyrna, GA

sempergoofy

Premium Member

Dolly just wants the best "technoogy"

Click for full size
Technoogy?
Either she needs to spell check, or she wants the best spectrum sensing "technoogy" she can get.
Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA

3 edits

Sammer

Member

Untrue Statement by WSD engineers.

"While most engineers we've spoken to in the industry do admit that White Space will be tricky to implement (the initial low power of devices in particular may hamper usefulness) most agree that after half a decade of debating the idea that it's time to at least give it a shot." These are not low power devices in relation to Wi-Fi. Even 40 milliwatts at TV frequencies will have considerably more range than Wi-Fi. For their claimed intended purpose 10 milliwatts on adjacent channels and 50 milliwatts on non-adjacent channels for unlicensed mobile white space devices would probably be adequate and would certainly reduce any unintentional interference.
Some of the WSD proponents have made it very clear they want all of TV channels 21-36,38-51 eventually. They won't say this but the way to accomplish that is to make sure the devices have enough power to interfere. Why is there such an insistence on such an aggressive start to WSDs? It will be impossible to get rid of any such devices that interfere once they're out there in numbers but it will always be possible to increase the power of future devices if the technology to diminish interference improves.

DavePR
join:2008-06-04
Canyon Country, CA

1 recommendation

DavePR

Member

White Space Devices won't work

In big cities there are too many TV stations to be able to find interference-free spectrum. In rural areas they would cause way too much interference to weak TV signals from the big cities. Bill Gates and Google will have to go elsewhere besides UHF 470-698 mHz. I suggest they try 54-72, 72-88 MHz. This propagates better than UHF anyway.

•••
wispalord
join:2007-09-20
Farmington, MO

wispalord

Member

ummm

like this whole point is dsl/cable dont want a new point of access to the home in rural areas, cause they know THEY WILL NEVER be able to compette and it just breaks there heart, im betting the 700mhz will be fixed like current wispa 900mhz instalations.

lalalalalalala
@direcpc.com

lalalalalalala

Anon

about poloticians

If Obama will raise taxes to improve broadband and they're such polar opposites that must mean McCain would probably tell the companies to get off their asses and clean up their act(corruption)! He's already going on about the people behind the current finacial crisis and how he's gonna make them pay and we will know their names. If true BRAVO i say.

DavePR
join:2008-06-04
Canyon Country, CA

DavePR

Member

Re: about poloticians

That should be easy for Mr. McCain as most of the perpetrators work for him.
russotto
join:2000-10-05
West Orange, NJ

russotto

Member

White Space Broadband = no TV

They can't avoid interfering with TV. First, TV tuners have relatively wide front-end filters. So it's not just devices on the channel which cause problems, it's adjacent and in come cases 2nd adjacent channels which cause problems. You can get away with 1st adjacent if the transmitting antennas are co-located and the power of the signal is similar, but that's simply not true with white space devices.

Second, people in these rural areas where this white space broadband stuff is proposed often need to use a pre-amp to get their TV reliably. A pre-amp amplifies across the whole band (or bands). A nearby white space transmitter anywhere within the band will overload the pre-amp and result in loss of reception.

It's just not feasible to run white space devices in the same spectrum as the current TV infrastructure without degrading the latter significantly.

Raioku
@windstream.net

Raioku

Anon

give us whitespace

White space would be really beneficial to alot of people including myself using windstreams low ass internet speed (1.5 mbps) and having to pay some 40-50$ for it. If white space comes download speeds would be rocket fast 30-50 mbps. Dolly parton doesnt even know what the hell she is talking about. I support whitespace 300%. If the people at the FCC have a brain they will allow this. And as for watching TV: look on the internet and I am sure you will find your favorite shows.