Slashdot Mirror

The pluses:

• unmetered bandwidth
• I got my own sideband slice, so my speeds were constant (1Mbps up and down)
• $55.00 USD per month, constant. No contract extensions were tacked on when I later added a static IP
• lag was present enough to hamper game play in an FPS (my antenna was 33 miles away from the tower), but still fairly usable
• when cable finally did arrive, everyone else whined about speeds bogging down at certain times of the day, while I never suffered any of that
• Sprint stopped taking on new customers when things got full (IOW, they couldn't quite 'oversell the modems' as easily as a typical ISP could)

• lag in FPS gaming. It was still playable, but tended to grate at times
• rainstorms would degrade things a LOT (fortunately, at that time I lived in Utah, where rain was a rare thing). Sometimes an appalling mass of packets would drop during a thunderstorm, occasionally breaking connections
• I had a 4 meter tall antenna mast on the roof with a somewhat ugly square antenna package parked atop it
• the initial cost was $300 USD for equipment and installation

Overall though, I'd say I was very satisfied. I experienced exactly one outage the whole time, IIRC... and it was back up in less than an hour. I'm in Oregon now, so it would be kind of impractical to use it here (it tends to rain a lot), but if they can overcome the limitations that I saw as late as 2005, then more power to 'em. It was one of the most pleasant experiences overall that I ever had with any ISP. Plus, I had the exquisite pleasure of telling a Qwest sales droid to fuck off when they finally did get DSL into the neighborhood three years later (really... 256Kpbs DSL, when I already had 1Mbps both ways? Pfft! whatever...)

/P

Have you looked at Sprint Broadband? http://www.sprintbroadband.com/

I live close to the boonies, 1 block away from having to use septic tanks. The internet mix is Cox and Sprint Broadband.
I haven't heard anything bad regarding this Sprint service. You get your own IP address and VPN isn't an issue.

And that link for sprint was typed wrong, it is SprintBroadband, not springbroadband. Sorry.

Sprint Broadband is apparently not accepting new customers, but there are still local and regional providers like Outlaw Wireless to be found.

ISP-Planet seems to be a good resource.

There's really nothing new here except the idea of using balloons. Wireless Internet has been available for a while now. The biggest flops so far have been Metricom (the original incarnation of the Ricochet Internet service) and Sprint Broadband Direct.

I had Metricom/Ricochet while I was in college. The Metricom radios, about the size of shoeboxes (1/1000 of a VW Beetle), were mounted on utility poles every kilometer or so. It was a great technology that was mostly killed by incompetent management, high deployment cost, and irrelevance as the rest of the world went from dial-up to DSL/cable. The bandwidth was pretty good for its day, but its latency sucked (typically 400ms minimum).

My dad got Sprint Broadband Direct after ditching DSL. Our DSL was unreliable since our house was too far from Pac Bell's switch box. Also, there is no cable modem service available in our area. So we turned to Sprint, which serves the San Francisco Bay Area through a tower in the Fremont Hills, about 50 km away. A Sprint technician came and installed a small dish antenna on our roof, and permanently aimed it at the tower.

We have been dissatisfied with Sprint Broadband Direct because:

• The latency sucks (400ms average)
• Lots of dropped packets, which I believe are due to the wireless link (10% typical, and worse when foggy)

The Sprint service isn't for everyone, since it requires a clear line of sight to the tower on the hill, and the right to mount an antenna on the roof. Combined with the high cost of deployment, these drawbacks have forced Sprint to deprecate the service.

The SkyLinc system seems to be most like Sprint's. The elevation of the balloons will be an advantage (probably negated by the fact that the antennas are not exactly stationary), but they'll have to overcome the same difficulties that have plagued previous systems.

Sad, but true is that it'll take a lot of forward-looking folks to bring this to the fruition. As much as Verizon, Qwest, Bell South, and the other Baby Bells complain that they have to bear the costs of maintaining the copper, it is essential to their business future. If they didn't have that cross to bear (that is, if wireless were available), then what would they have to block out competition as effectively as they can today?

Wireless would be wonderful. But only companies such as Sprint, who is a minority player (relatively, on a national level) in the local market anyway, can actually afford to offer it... And even they've given up. The rest simply don't want to challenge their business plan that much. And can you blame them? The investors would have the head of Ivan Seidenberg.

Face it, we're stuck.

jrbd

Sprint Broadband Direct, who don't accept new customers, recently raised my rate by five bucks a month.

It would have been ten, but I refused the Earthlink account.

--Blair

Nokia is making a go at building wireless broadband solutions. OK, so the original article was about wireless cable distribution with data as a bonus. The "business plan" of going head to head with the cable companies just on price seems unlikely to work, especially with the FCC deciding the spectrum would be auctioned off.

Are you kidding me? I have Sprint Broadband (fixed wireless). I am getting 5MB downstream and about 156k up.

Although the mobile thing certainly has its advantages....

If you were building a system from scratch for wireless internet, how would you do it today?

MMDS providers seem to be having lots of porblems that might be technical or might be excessive cash burn rate. Its run in the 2.ish ghz range and is line of site using well known technology. Sprint had been offering it in places like Chicago but isn't any more. From what I can tell MMDS is the lowest cost option right now and most of the others have never been rolled out or are still in the planning stages.

Some very small towns now have 802.11b systems but thats limited to a very small population and won't work for more than a few hundred people and they don't scale well.

What's the difference between this and what Sprint Broadband has offered and already quit offering. And my ISP, JORSM Internet, has been working on supporting this for some time and believe do offer it to non residential customers already although there website don't say anything about it. Just thought it was wierd to hear about something on here that i knew existed for months.

-Al-

...but Earthlink isn't.

If this is the same technology as Sprint Broadband just got out of the business of selling (as posited in an above posting), then yes, this is a "Lightning Fast" connection. I can download .zip files from Sprint's 1-hop FTP servers at 6 Megs a second.

But. As soon as the hopcount hits Earthlink on it's to the internet, things slooooooow doooooown. I can top out at 150kps, but only on the best of days, and it's usually more like 50kps.

Also, latency isn't bad until you hit Earthlink. It's about 50ms for the 1st 3 hops or so. It ramps up to 200-300ms once it hits Earthlink.

Sprint is still providing service to their existing customer base, however, they have suspended all new install orders.

It seems pretty easy to understand to me: they tried to expand too much too quickly, and their network's limitations started being painfully obvious. I actually had the service for a while in Arizona, as did some of my friends, and they had started to notice pretty high latency on their connections.

Let's hope this doesn't happen with the new wave of wireless companies that are venturing (bravely, I might add, in light of all that's happened) into the market.

*trenton

Sprint's horrid wireless broadband service says the same thing...

We are suspending our effort to acquire new residential and commercial Sprint Broadband Direct customers.

I guess Sprint internet is not doing well right now.

Sprint Broadband provides the same kind of service in major metropolitan areas. You get up to 5 Mbps at costs comparable to DSL or cable. In the SF Bay Area, Sprint Broadband actually started out as a small, local company.

Sprint does the same kind of stupid crap. Except they say "we require you to have a firewall and you cannot port scan us, but we can port scan you" Total bullshit if you ask me. You can check out the
Acceptable Use Policy
They haven't sent any threatening e-mails to me yet, but i'm sure the day will come.

Check this out:

http://www.sprintbroadband.com

We've always been fighting over DSL vs. Cable modems, and here Sprint comes along and shows us all up. Rats. :-)

P.S. Just cut and paste if you're afraid of the link.

I just HAVE to weigh in with my own experience here. Sorry in advance for the rambling. It's therapeutic. SWB has been jacking me around the same way for the last 6 months. I moved into my new apartment in December and ordered DSL then (we are within walking distance of the CO). The order was approved, and slated for installation on Jan 2. Around Christmas time, I get a letter saying something to the effect of oh, something is wrong and we can't install it after all. No further explanation. So I call them. At this point I first hear the term pair gain though with no further explanation, and I also didn't ask. But I do get told that it is slated to be fixed sometime in the first quarter of 2001. Later in January, the helpful SWB salesperson leaves a message saying that the problem on my line now has been fixed, and she is reinstating my order. It should be installed in February. The day of the installation the install technician realizes that I am still on pair gain, and leaves a message to that effect. At this point I am really curious about what pair gain really is, call SWB, and finally end up with a technician from Advanced Solutions, which handles their DSL installations. He informs me that though I am within the required distance from the CO, the phone company is running fiber to my apartment (pair gain), but - but - there is an RT in my neighborhood, which should give me a really good DSL connection, ONCE THE DSLAM IS INSTALLED, which is part of SWB/SWB Internet/Advanced Solutions' Project Pronto. Pronto my ass. We now constantly get flooded with advertisement from SWB, saying DSL is now available in your area, and why wait on the old dial-up connection. Well, the first time I got the ad in the mail, I again reinstated my order, only to be followed by a very rude message on our answering machine from a fellow at Advanced Solutions named Steve, who, frustrated as he was, couldn't understand why the salespeople would keep taking [our] order, when [we are] on pair gain. So why am I still bothering with the telcos in order to get DSL? Aren't there other alternatives? Well... Yes and no. I can't get AOL Time Warner's RoadRunner, as our apartment complex has Optel. I can't get Optel's cable modem service as our apartment complex doesn't subscribe to it, and has no plans to. I can't get Sprint's ION, because they don't install it in multi-dwelling units. I can't get Sprint's Broadband Direct, because there is no direct line-of-sight between our balcony (which is the only place where the apartment complex will let us put up the transceiver) and the Sprint's central antenna. I can't get DirecPC's satellite feed, because said balcony is facing north and the satellite is due South. And finally, I can't get ATT Broadband (another fixed wireless technology, that does not require line-of-sight) because their antennae, on a building 4 blocks south of us either is not turned on, or they are pointing in the wrong direction, or they are simply honoring their agreement with AOL Time Warner to not sell to customers who are in an AOL Time Warner served area (which we technically are). For now, DSL is my only option. But since there apparently is no incentive for SWB to install the DSLAm in the remote terminal, I, and everyone else in our apartment complex, are screwed.

Not many people mention it, because it's only been deployed a few months to >15 cities so far, but I've been very happy with my wireless broadband access. Mine's provided by Sprint Broadband. It's dedicated bandwidth (unlike cable), and installation was painless (unlike DSL). Download performance for me varies between 500 kpbs to 1.3 kbps, but I've seen bursts that a lot higher. On the other hand, it was faster for me when I first had it installed, and slower in the past month or so. I suspect that it's because the tower is servicing more people. It's not affected by rain or snow, not that I've been able to detect.

Now the downside is, it requires a line-of-sight to the tower, which isn't as bad as it sounds. I'm 25-30 miles from the tower, and I definitely can't see it, so it doesn't have to be visible. I can't get cable or DSL out where I am, by the way. This is probably not so good for people who live in densely wooded places, but it works great in Denver.

Installation was painless. I set up and appointment over the web, the guy showed up (with five minutes left in his two-hour arrival window, but okay, still within the window) mounted a transceiver on the roof, ran some cabling, hooked up the modem, and was done in two hours.

That's the only real problem with XHF transmissions.. (XHF is basically anything above a gigahertz).. they are all line-of-sight.

Clouds, though, shouldn't realy be a problem unless they're VERY thick. The wavelength of a 2.2 GHz wave (I'm assuming 2.2 GHz because I know 2.4 is occupied, and it's the same drek in a different package) is:

c / freq == 300Mm/s / 2.2GHz == .136 m / Hz.

The wavelength is 13 cm or so. That's mighty small (when you consider that AM 1000 is 300m and FM 100.0 is 3m), but they can pass through anything short of a heavy rainfall or a blizzard. (I have a DBS system and can receive in virtually all conditions. Idiot involvement, though, seems to screw everything up royally.)

The short wavelength dictates the LOS and the power of the frequency will determine the range.

I have to commend Sprint's good timing, since a lot of DSL'rs got screwed when northpoint Comms. went bankrupt.

And now, for the coup de grace that'll get me jacked on wireless broadband: It's two-way. According to this marketdroid page, it's completely free of the telephone grid.

However, for you QUAKErs, your ping time may be slightly slower than it would be on a comparable hard-wired connection. This appears (from what little data that's available) to be (at least in part) a party-line system.

According to the site (use zip 60625 if asked), the max d/l is 5 Mbps, and they project 'typical' to be in the .5 to 1.5 Mbps range.

They have an upload cap of 256 kbps.

A few things worth keeping in mind:

1. It's running on RF frequencies, which means that, depending on your paranoia level, you may not want it since quality receivers are available that can receive above 2GHz. And it's not protected by the anti-cell-scanner bills (not like anyone interested in cracking t

2. IP Masquerade is probably the best way to go. They seem to be MScentric. (They are intending to charge an additional ten bucks a month per extra rig online. I didn't know IP's were that rare ;)

Ruling The World, One Moron At A Time(tm)
"As Kosher As A Bacon-Cheeseburger"(tmp)

That's the only real problem with XHF transmissions.. (XHF is basically anything above a gigahertz).. they are all line-of-sight.

Clouds, though, shouldn't realy be a problem unless they're VERY thick. The wavelength of a 2.2 GHz wave (I'm assuming 2.2 GHz because I know 2.4 is occupied, and it's the same drek in a different package) is:

c / freq == 300Mm/s / 2.2GHz == .136 m / Hz.

The wavelength is 13 cm or so. That's mighty small (when you consider that AM 1000 is 300m and FM 100.0 is 3m), but they can pass through anything short of a heavy rainfall or a blizzard. (I have a DBS system and can receive in virtually all conditions. Idiot involvement, though, seems to screw everything up royally.)

The short wavelength dictates the LOS and the power of the frequency will determine the range.

I have to commend Sprint's good timing, since a lot of DSL'rs got screwed when northpoint Comms. went bankrupt.

And now, for the coup de grace that'll get me jacked on wireless broadband: It's two-way. According to this marketdroid page, it's completely free of the telephone grid.

However, for you QUAKErs, your ping time may be slightly slower than it would be on a comparable hard-wired connection. This appears (from what little data that's available) to be (at least in part) a party-line system.

According to the site (use zip 60625 if asked), the max d/l is 5 Mbps, and they project 'typical' to be in the .5 to 1.5 Mbps range.

They have an upload cap of 256 kbps.

A few things worth keeping in mind:

1. It's running on RF frequencies, which means that, depending on your paranoia level, you may not want it since quality receivers are available that can receive above 2GHz. And it's not protected by the anti-cell-scanner bills (not like anyone interested in cracking t

2. IP Masquerade is probably the best way to go. They seem to be MScentric. (They are intending to charge an additional ten bucks a month per extra rig online. I didn't know IP's were that rare ;)

Ruling The World, One Moron At A Time(tm)
"As Kosher As A Bacon-Cheeseburger"(tmp)

That's the only real problem with XHF transmissions.. (XHF is basically anything above a gigahertz).. they are all line-of-sight.

Clouds, though, shouldn't realy be a problem unless they're VERY thick. The wavelength of a 2.2 GHz wave (I'm assuming 2.2 GHz because I know 2.4 is occupied, and it's the same drek in a different package) is:

c / freq == 300Mm/s / 2.2GHz == .136 m / Hz.

The wavelength is 13 cm or so. That's mighty small (when you consider that AM 1000 is 300m and FM 100.0 is 3m), but they can pass through anything short of a heavy rainfall or a blizzard. (I have a DBS system and can receive in virtually all conditions. Idiot involvement, though, seems to screw everything up royally.)

The short wavelength dictates the LOS and the power of the frequency will determine the range.

I have to commend Sprint's good timing, since a lot of DSL'rs got screwed when northpoint Comms. went bankrupt.

And now, for the coup de grace that'll get me jacked on wireless broadband: It's two-way. According to this marketdroid page, it's completely free of the telephone grid.

However, for you QUAKErs, your ping time may be slightly slower than it would be on a comparable hard-wired connection. This appears (from what little data that's available) to be (at least in part) a party-line system.

According to the site (use zip 60625 if asked), the max d/l is 5 Mbps, and they project 'typical' to be in the .5 to 1.5 Mbps range.

They have an upload cap of 256 kbps.

A few things worth keeping in mind:

1. It's running on RF frequencies, which means that, depending on your paranoia level, you may not want it since quality receivers are available that can receive above 2GHz. And it's not protected by the anti-cell-scanner bills (not like anyone interested in cracking t

2. IP Masquerade is probably the best way to go. They seem to be MScentric. (They are intending to charge an additional ten bucks a month per extra rig online. I didn't know IP's were that rare ;)

Ruling The World, One Moron At A Time(tm)
"As Kosher As A Bacon-Cheeseburger"(tmp)

It's not DSL. It's MMDS -- Multichannel Multipoint Distribution Service.

Sprint Broadband is one of the largest customers of Hybrid Networks Inc.

In fact, there's even an interesting little press release on Hybrid's site regarding the whole deal in Chicago.

This isn't very new to me, as the majority of my work and home bandwidth is provided by a local ISP that has been deploying these systems since the Fall of 1998. As an individual subscriber I've pulled traffic nearing the 8Mbit/sec mark. Yep, that's something a little more than the equivalent of five T-1's.

MMDS has a lot of advantages over your typical "unlicensed" wireless gear operating in the 900MHz and 2.4GHz spectrum... namely the fact that MMDS is licensed by the FCC (in the US).

Businesses that build their existance and survival on the fragile structure of "unlicensed" wireless often don't spend the time to properly research what it is that they are getting into... a mess. The first "provider" in an area to deploy "unlicensed" equipment has great success... and then the second "provider" comes along... and things start to slow down a little... and then another provider comes along perhaps... and things start to break (more)...

And then an Amateur Radio Operator/ham comes along and decides to start using the spectrum for Amateur TV, and the FCC comes in and shuts the "providers" down as they are infringing on the rightful license of said ham to use the 2.4GHz spectrum. *poof* :)

Another thing to consider, and one of the other reasons I like my MMDS provider... They don't have that interestingly restrictive TOS that Sprint Broadband has.

But worse than you doing free advertising for them by distributing their stuff to friends, you might actually shun their content completely and do something on your own. Instead of mindlessly consuming addictive and useless content while being fed advertising, you might actually engage in dialog with other human beings--no revenue opportunities there, no way to get you to consume more. You might even broadcast a school production of an out-of-copyright Shakespeare or Bach work and not have to pay anyone for it. Such civic activities would be downright un-American.

And if the excuse of bandwidth limitations doesn't work anymore (128Mbps downstream, 128kbps might start looking ridiculous to even the most clueless), restrictive terms of service will keep you from using fast uplinks for anything that might endanger anybody's revenue stream, whether you have a legal right to or not.

My dad lives in South San Jose, CA and can't get xDSL or cable-modem service! So, he just got signed up w/ Sprint's wireless thing. It uses a small, diamond-shaped antenna for a line-of-sight, two-way comm. Also, it's supposedly 2Mb or so both ways, under low network load; and 500k/s both ways most of the time. I wonder if this is the service that works at the high GHz range and performs poorer during rain? Oh well, too bad it's not offered here near Davis.

Time to look at dslreports.com to find another ISP...

Shirky isn't referring to services such as San Francisco's Ricochet, a wireless Internet access network provider from San Jose's Metricom. He wants to know whether citizens will be given free or subsidized wireless access, as if it were a municipal utility like water. He muses, "In New York, we have laws that give zoning variances for skyscrapers in return for creating public spaces. These public spaces could easily include 802.11b networks."

A better solution for Mr. Shirky's (slashdot interview) proposal would be to use the adjacent regulated spectrum that is being used for MMDS, a new broadband wireless service that is being rolled out.

The MMDS service occupies the same spectrum as ITFS (warning government website, design will make you cry), a service underutilized by universities to provide public service. The FCC is allowing these licenses to be snatched up by MMDS providers for gaining the licensees much ($40 according to itfs.org) and the public for which the service was created nothing.

Seems to me that putting some real public interest obligations on those licenses in the form of providing public wireless access would be a better use of that spectrum.

http://www.sprintbroadband.com

Actually, there is something kinda like this out now. Sprint Broadband Direct has a service to 'beam' the internet over radio waves from a tower to your house via a small 13.5" square antenna from up to 35 miles away. My parents just ordered it (they live in Tucson). Their neighbors already have it and love it. I'm not sure where else it is available... but it *is* out there.

--

Have you looked into the Sprint wireless solution, seems to be quick self-install option.. it's wireless and fast from what I've heard. I know several people in Tucson using it already, and it's supposed to be available in maricopa county. http://www.sprintbroadband.com This isn't like the DSS dish thing where you still have to dialup for upstream traffic... apparently it's a roof mounted flat dish wireless tranciever. Might be worth a look... could this be the future? Can't wait for this to come to california.

I placed my order for 256 connection on 2/14/2000. At that time, they said that my 'due date' (the date I'd be connected) was 2/28/2000. I had mentioned that I'd prefer the 512 service. The next day, the cust serv rep called and said they could do 512. On 2/28/2000 I was connected @ 512.

Since then this is my down time log:

3/21/2000 - 6 hours
3/28/2000 - 12 hours
4/7/2000 - 10 minutes
7/23/2000 - ~60 minutes
7/24/2000 - 7 hours
9/12/2000 - 90 minutes

Good things:

1. I was set-up/connected when they said I'd be.

2. Getting up and going was quick and easy. They provide a couple of manuals about the Cisco 675 modem. You can telnet into the box or get in via serial cable and boom you're talking directly to the system. You can set up filters, block ports, etc.

3. When it's up it's fast - I am doing 512 down and 544 up (coming from a 33.6 modem lifestyle that's fast ~8^).

4. For what I need, I also like the added security of using a Cisco modem. While it's not totally secure, there are fewer security concerns than when directly connected as you are with cable.

My complaints all have to do with technical support/customer service. Luckily I'm technically able and can figure out some issues on my own. I really pitty those who have to rely hevily on the tech support.

1. Getting through to the technical support is time consuming. I would estimate that the average wait time is about 15 minutes.

2. Unexpected down time. When it goes down who knows the duration - the tech support never have an est. time.

3. The tech support people with whom I've talked know very little. You either get a run around (yes, I tried that and that and that) or "Could you hold on while I check with someone else?".

4. They don't offer individual static IPs. The modem gets its IP via DHCP. Then the internal machines get their IPs from the modem's DHCP so the internal IPs could possibly change too (I'm a big fan of ip-masq/chains). You have the option of getting a block of 8 static IPs for an additional $14/month (I don't know how many off-hand but not all of those 8 are usable by you - one is for the modem another is for ?? and so on).

5. The ISP and the modem people are two separate entities. So you constantly get the finger pointing ("It's not us it's them").

Well, I've gone on long enough. I hope this has been helpful.

Another option I've been considering is Sprint Broadband