Slashdot Mirror

Yes, it's pretty clear from (failed) anti-trust proceedings in the EU against the telecoms operators that patents are the underlying long term reason for high costs that even regulators cannot correct. Patent licensing makes legal a cartel that would be criminal in any other case. There are no technical reasons for high mobile voice/data costs. Landline costs are low. Internet costs are low. GSM infrastructure is now 10+ years old in Europe.

The cost of spectrum might be responsible for short term high costs but those licenses are long paid off.

ITSUG controls who can and cannot do business with GSM in Europe and USA. Competition is excluded, prices are defined between members, and anti-trust authorities are powerless to intervene because it's all legal, thanks to patent licensing.

It does not even matter what the patents actually say. They simply enable the cartel, that's their key role here.

I have heard it is Youtube (owned by Google) policy to remove videos with a takedown notice, so they would have been removed anyway, valid DMCA or not.

"A new 3G (European) version of the iPhone will be launched Monday in the UK by Apple - in a join promotion with Vodafone, T-Mobile of Germany, and Carphone Warehouse. It should answer the disappointment with the US version of the iPhone which has been widely slammed for its poor performance as a phone."

http://www.newswireless.net/index.cfm/article/3466

If this is indeed true, it will certainly be what the market needs. I am surprised the US market would tolerate paying so much for a 2G phone.

Sounds like the US market is behind the 8 ball, with a couple of years to wait for a 3G - time will be indeed telling.

There is a difference, isn't there?

It also depends on what you call a "kill Switch".
I can just see it now, though....

Lt: Seaman! There are two battle cruisers about come inside targeting range! What *are* you doing????!!! .
seaman: It says: "Functionality temporarily disabled. Please insert installation CD and enter activation code." I'm looking for the installation CD, but I don't even know if we have a CD player.
Lt: Oh, man... They were removed for security reasons....
Intercom: Brace for incomming round!

except it's not affecting the pirates. they crack it and it's business as usual

...and in the mean time, legit users like half of Proctor and Gamble's installed PC base get hit with false notifications accusing them of piracy. This is going to get interesting.

To me it does what it should.

Unfortunately, it's not all about you. Maybe you should ask the USAF how WGA works for them. Scary to think that US military computers could be shut down by Microsoft, or a Microsoft glitch. See here for the true purpose of WGA.

• Sendo
• Ashton-Tate
• Auto-By-Tel
• Electric Gravity
• IBM
• Micrographx
• RealNetworks (formerly Progressive Networks)
• SpyGlass
• 3com

What forced the issue in New Orleans was the activities of the Locustworld folks. They set up the very first mesh after the disaster(Locusworld's product is Linux based and Open Source). My understanding is that some other folks came in and made most of the money(i.e. just because there was some donated equipment, don't think there wasn't some pork).

I guess we will eventually have variations on this device in cameras to handle that requirement.

Lufthansa has about 80 planes with wifi already, they fly to destinations in the US and Germany..

The Quinkey Microwriter... I had a left-handed one for a while, some ... 17 years ago, maybe? Look here for a review of one. This item has a picture of one...

Shearer characterised Katherine Albrecht, RFID privacy activist and founder and director of lobby group Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering, as being "confused" about the technologies that she is campaigning against. RFID tags used in retail stores, Shearer said, "[could] only measure a short distance".

Shearer also said IBM was trialling the use of RFID tags in US schools for mentally disabled children in a move that she claimed had full support from most parents.

"These children are primarily kept indoors at the moment because they escape otherwise and might get hurt. So what we are going to do is with two of these huge schools, is to give the children an RFID bracelet that they take off at the end of the day so that we know where they are, and if they walk out the gate then we would know," said Shearer.

I'll shut up after this, promise. :-)

Multisecond RTT doesn't happen on anything but GPRS

I've seen it far too often on congested wifi networks. you easily get into a congested state with a crowded AP that forces lots of client waits for the DCF (i.e DIFS + padding, each in turn) and also induces lots of retransmission at the physical level due to collision with so many clients trying to talk to the same AP. Low power clients associated at the 1 or 2 Mbps rates drive this contention over the DCF even higher, severely punishing everyone associated.

The big conference venues are notoriously bad about this, as you often end up with 10-20+ people associated with a single access point. That is just too many, and the 802.11 MAC was never meant to handle that kind of load efficiently. It is a pretty good solution for the general case that simply can't cover all the edge cases (long shots, high client loads, noisy RF environments).

This type of situation results in really weird ping times, for example. I've seen fluctuations myself that go from 80ms, 120ms to 3s!, 2s!, etc. then back down to a few score milliseconds. That is the 802.11 MAC trying to cope with scenario's it was never designed to encounter.

I mentioned software radios in the first post because having access to timing and congestion control in the MAC would allow mesh boxes, clients, and AP's to make very significant performance enhancements for situations where they were needed. Why be forced to use a static, inflexible, proprietary hardware layer when you can have the open flexibility associated with software radio? (It's coming, just not soon enough :-) There are also extensions to the ad-hoc routing protocols (like passive monitor of route info between other clients in DSR) that could be supported if only the hardware was open enough to do so.

I don't want to bitch too much; we have come a long way from sub-megabit data via FHSS over 900Mhz. I just want the really good stuff to hurry up and get here already so that things like mesh networks, low latency/loss voice over IP, and highly available multipath/redundant network configurations can be enjoyed to their full potential. (software radio + multiple input / multiple output + intelligent network stacks that can handle a diverse and volatile network environment). ... and a pony!

Gratuitous links:
congestion problems at TechEd conference

congestion melt down at CeBIT

GNU Radio's software defined radio (SDR)

software defined radio on $2,000 of 'roids [it's a dev kit, but would work very well for almost any kind of project]

I'll shut up after this, promise. :-)

Multisecond RTT doesn't happen on anything but GPRS

I've seen it far too often on congested wifi networks. you easily get into a congested state with a crowded AP that forces lots of client waits for the DCF (i.e DIFS + padding, each in turn) and also induces lots of retransmission at the physical level due to collision with so many clients trying to talk to the same AP. Low power clients associated at the 1 or 2 Mbps rates drive this contention over the DCF even higher, severely punishing everyone associated.

The big conference venues are notoriously bad about this, as you often end up with 10-20+ people associated with a single access point. That is just too many, and the 802.11 MAC was never meant to handle that kind of load efficiently. It is a pretty good solution for the general case that simply can't cover all the edge cases (long shots, high client loads, noisy RF environments).

This type of situation results in really weird ping times, for example. I've seen fluctuations myself that go from 80ms, 120ms to 3s!, 2s!, etc. then back down to a few score milliseconds. That is the 802.11 MAC trying to cope with scenario's it was never designed to encounter.

I mentioned software radios in the first post because having access to timing and congestion control in the MAC would allow mesh boxes, clients, and AP's to make very significant performance enhancements for situations where they were needed. Why be forced to use a static, inflexible, proprietary hardware layer when you can have the open flexibility associated with software radio? (It's coming, just not soon enough :-) There are also extensions to the ad-hoc routing protocols (like passive monitor of route info between other clients in DSR) that could be supported if only the hardware was open enough to do so.

I don't want to bitch too much; we have come a long way from sub-megabit data via FHSS over 900Mhz. I just want the really good stuff to hurry up and get here already so that things like mesh networks, low latency/loss voice over IP, and highly available multipath/redundant network configurations can be enjoyed to their full potential. (software radio + multiple input / multiple output + intelligent network stacks that can handle a diverse and volatile network environment). ... and a pony!

Gratuitous links:
congestion problems at TechEd conference

congestion melt down at CeBIT

GNU Radio's software defined radio (SDR)

software defined radio on $2,000 of 'roids [it's a dev kit, but would work very well for almost any kind of project]

this is just a publicity stunt.

And it worked.

I'm going to buy this album and I've never even heard of this band. Sooner or later, the music industry will realize that the old ways are dead. Pretty soon, McDonalds and Taco Bell will be record labels of their own, selling new releases with the purchase of a value meal.

What did you think that those Wifi installations were for anyway? New cell phones will have WiFi and Bluetooth by the end of '05. It will be easy.

If you read the actual blog entry, Rob refers to the actual record of 310 km (192 miles) by a Swedish team.

Man, I know this is slashdot and no one reads the articles, but you thing the editors would once in a while.

I ran across this article today... apparently someone is already trying to put together a mobile system around AMD's new 64-bit offering.

OK, here's a slightly better translation (my own):

"It needs to be stressed that the link created here was a typical ground-based connection, as opposed to the link created at the end of 2002 in Sweden which used a stratospheric baloon"

For details of that accomplishment, go here (this link was posted already in this thread here by wherley).

Essentially, the Swedish ground-to-air link was aided by a 6Watt amp and achieved a distance of over 300km. In comparison, the Polish link was ground-to-ground (i.e. subject to much more interference, be it EMI or air pollution), reached about 1/3rd of the distance while using 1/12th the power.

or not?.

There isn't much to block a radio signal if you're in a balloon; so the news that Alvarion has managed to reach a 310 km distance probably isn't as exciting as it sounds.

Here
is the story from July of an outfit getting 310km using WiFi from ground to a balloon. This was done by Alvarion and the Swedish Space Corporation and acknowledged by Guinness (as in world records not as in beer).

Seems like a great idea, a neat way of overcoming the last-mile and bringing broadband to a lot more people in the UK.

IMHO, major obstacles stand in its way:

1) Cost. Each balloon may take millions (of UK pounds) to put up so any cost savings assume a sufficient subscriber base; and don't forget the satellite-TV style transceiver dish required for each customer site. Once the first one goes up, what's to stop existing providers dropping their prices to compensate?

2) Available bandwidth. Isn't unlikely that the system will "not slow down as more and more people use the service", especially as SkyLinc themselves state that the system is scaleable (i.e. why would it need to be scalable if performance never degraded with load?)

3) Weather. As every English-person knows, the weather in the UK can be erratic and extreme (for example, more tornadoes per unit area than anywhere in the world). Relying on an "antenna stabilisation system" may sound like a good idea, and it may even work, but who would believe it enough to spend the installation fee on it?

4) Coverage. Despite the article's optimistic "18 base stations" providing "total UK coverage, from densely populated towns to the remotest cottage in the Scottish Highlands" the SkyLinc website claims only "87% of UK SME business locations" for the same number of base stations - which I suspect counts out most remote locations.

5) CAA approval - SkyLinc might expect to make most money out of densely populated areas, but as these are often near airports what's the chance of CAA approval in all but a couple of test sites?

Of course, it serves the UK govt. to support this scheme and make encouraging sounds about it. At the very least it will stop most people from wondering why the govt. pushes 'broadband Britain' but allows a practical monopoly, paid for by the taxpayer, to slow the spread of broadband (hey, even remote cottages in the Scottish Highlands have BT phone lines).

Personally, I'm all for the idea, but I don't think it will ever get off the ground but if Guy Kewney says/implies/suggests it's a good idea then who am I to disagree! Hey, I even like the idea of having my own balloon to tow 'behind' my car in case of emergencies and traffic jams.

Seems like a great idea, a neat way of overcoming the last-mile and bringing broadband to a lot more people in the UK.

IMHO, major obstacles stand in its way:

1) Cost. Each balloon may take millions (of UK pounds) to put up so any cost savings assume a sufficient subscriber base; and don't forget the satellite-TV style transceiver dish required for each customer site. Once the first one goes up, what's to stop existing providers dropping their prices to compensate?

2) Available bandwidth. Isn't unlikely that the system will "not slow down as more and more people use the service", especially as SkyLinc themselves state that the system is scaleable (i.e. why would it need to be scalable if performance never degraded with load?)

3) Weather. As every English-person knows, the weather in the UK can be erratic and extreme (for example, more tornadoes per unit area than anywhere in the world). Relying on an "antenna stabilisation system" may sound like a good idea, and it may even work, but who would believe it enough to spend the installation fee on it?

4) Coverage. Despite the article's optimistic "18 base stations" providing "total UK coverage, from densely populated towns to the remotest cottage in the Scottish Highlands" the SkyLinc website claims only "87% of UK SME business locations" for the same number of base stations - which I suspect counts out most remote locations.

5) CAA approval - SkyLinc might expect to make most money out of densely populated areas, but as these are often near airports what's the chance of CAA approval in all but a couple of test sites?

Of course, it serves the UK govt. to support this scheme and make encouraging sounds about it. At the very least it will stop most people from wondering why the govt. pushes 'broadband Britain' but allows a practical monopoly, paid for by the taxpayer, to slow the spread of broadband (hey, even remote cottages in the Scottish Highlands have BT phone lines).

Personally, I'm all for the idea, but I don't think it will ever get off the ground but if Guy Kewney says/implies/suggests it's a good idea then who am I to disagree! Hey, I even like the idea of having my own balloon to tow 'behind' my car in case of emergencies and traffic jams.

Almost everything in the statement was incorrect. Those posts which aren't pro-war jingoism tend to miss this.

I could point to all the errors individually - GSM is the world standard; America is the only significant nation to use CDMA; GSM works in America and is the fastest-growing standard there; it isn't French; lots of American companies make and sell GSM kit; and so on and so on.

But it's been done already, by noted industry commentator Guy Kewney. Go read and learn. He has responded in an open letter directly to congressman Issa.

And this FAQ says "the OneDriver software that ships with AirForce solutions uses the same driver for 802.11a, 802.11b, and 802.11g, so that customers of our 802.11b solution will be able to upgrade to the newer high-speed standards without changing their PCâ(TM)s software image."

Mailing list discussions seem to indicate that there are developers willing to write drivers to support Broadcom chipsets, but Broadcom is not "forthcoming with specs."