Category Archives: Wireless Internet

Slow and Expensive U.S.

Larry Cohen, President, CWA Speed is trivial, but you’d think we could do better than this:
The average broadband download speed in the US is only 1.9 megabits per second, compared to 61 Mbps in Japan, 45 Mbps in South Korea, 18 Mbps in Sweden, 17 Mpbs in France, and 7 Mbps in Canada, according to the Communication Workers of America.

US high-speed Internet is slow, Submitted by Canada IFP, Press Esc, on Sun, 2007-05-20

And as we’ve seen, that list of countries could soon include Hong Kong and India, because they’re taking the problem seriously. More interesting was this was said to. Continue reading

National Embarrassment

A newspaper notes the national embarrassment of the U.S. slipping from 12th to 15th place in broadband per capita among big rich countries:
Worse, much of U.S. “broadband” service is only a smidgen faster than a dial-up modem. Japan leads the world in cutting-edge fiber connections, offering speeds of up to 100 Mbps to 7.9 million home subscribers in 2006. In the United States, only a paltry 700,000 have fiber connections. Moreover, the Japanese pay $35 a month for their ultrafast speed, which is enough to stream full-screen, high-definition video. Most Americans pay the same price for one-twentieth the speed.

Editorial: We’re stuck in the slow lane of the information highway, Valley and U.S. must push harder for a faster Internet, Mercury News Editorial, San Jose Mercury News, Article Launched: 05/07/2007 01:32:59 AM PDT

I was beginning to wonder if anybody else noticed that part about Japan. Continue reading

FCC and Wireless Broadband

As we’ve seen, the FCC is trying to decide what to do with some 700Mhz commercial spectrum. Now we hear that:
The upcoming auction of wireless spectrum in the 700MHz band presents an opportunity for wireless technology to be a third broadband pipe beyond just DSL and cable Internet, Martin said.

&mdash FCC chairman champions wireless broadband access, Upcoming spectrum auction viewed as opportunity, By Paul Krill, InfoWorld, May 03, 2007

FCC Chair Kevin Martin said this at Microsoft offices in Mountain View, CA. One has to wonder why he’s announcing a purported competition measure at the offices of the world’s most famous monopoly. But nevermind that. Continue reading

FCC Sees Wireless Broadband Internet as Information Service

The FCC has reclassified wireless broadband Internet access services as information services, just like DSL, BPL, and cable modems:
Today, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) declared that wireless broadband Internet access service is an information service under the Communications Act (Act). This action places wireless broadband Internet access service on the same regulatory footing as other broadband services, such as cable modem service, wireline broadband (DSL) Internet access service, and Broadband over Power Line (BPL)-enabled Internet access service. It thus ensures that wireless broadband Internet access services are similarly free from unnecessary regulatory burdens. Competition among all of these broadband services will provide consumers with more and better services at lower prices.

&mdash: FCC CLASSIFIES WIRELESS BROADBAND INTERNET ACCESS SERVICE AS AN INFORMATION SERVICE, Chelsea Fallon, FCC, 22 March 2007

Well, there is more competition in wireless Internet access than in cable or telco Internet access, but given the track record of this classification thus far in actually promoting more and better services, I have to remain sceptical. Also notice the word “consumers”, not participants.

-jsq

Wireless Net Neutrality Redux

Tim Wu’s paper, Wireless Net Neutrality: Cellular Carterfone on Mobile Networks, continues to draw reactions. This one is a bit puzzling:
First, Wu writes as if this were a new issue. Just like the broader debate over network neutrality, in reality this is another version of an extensively debated topic: when should a network operator be forced to allow users particular types of access to its network? Wu ignores the history of this type of regulation.

Wireless Net Neutrality? by Scott Wallsten, Progress Snapshot, Release 3.2 February 2007,

Puzzling because the subtitle of Wu’s paper mentions Carterfone, as in the FCC decision that began net neutrality as we know it. Wu’s paper proceeds to discuss Carterfone on several pages, even including a picture of the actual physical object. Continue reading

Wireless Carterfone

Landline broadband isn’t the only arena in which net neutrality is needed.
A paper published by Columbia University Law School Professor Tim Wu claims that wireless networks don’t play by the same rules that wired networks do and limit consumer choice. Skype, for one, agreed with him and petitioned the FCC to mandate that wireless network operators open their networks to more devices and applications. The CTIA fired back.

Wu stated that the FCC’s Carterfone rules “continue to affect innovation and the development of new devices and applications for wireless networks.” His comments elicited a large response from the industry and refocused the net neutrality discussion, this time on the wireless networks.

Wu went on to argue that the carriers exert too much control over the design of mobile equipment and said, “They have used that power to force equipment developers to omit or cripple many consumer-friendly features.”

Paper Sparks Wireless Net Neutrality Debate, By Eric M. Zeman, WirelessWeek, February 28, 2007, NEWS@2 DIRECT

Skype then filed with the FCC to open wireless networks to non-carrier equipment. Continue reading