Slashdot Mirror


What is the Current Status of WiMAX?

PalletBoy asks: "I live in BFE (read 'remote') Pennsylvania where BroadBand is not available in any form save satellite, which is no good for price and latency reasons (curse my MMO addiction!). My big question is: what is the -actual- current status of WiMAX technology? Different sites have me believing different things and I can't find an exact answer to the question 'When will I be able to buy a WiMAX router and cards so I can remotely receive broadband?' When will WiMAX (802.16) be solidly standardized, out, and affordable? Or is it already there?"

171 of 239 comments (clear)

  1. I Was In Your Shoes by geomon · · Score: 4, Informative

    Until two regional companies started offering radio-link internet. I get 256Kb/sec up/down and am eyeballing another provider who will offer better transfer rates for the same price. The only problem is the price. Both ISPs charge $60/month. I am able to justify the price because I can telecommute a few days a month and save gas in my car. My dial-up was $15/month with a $17/month second telephone line. I looked into Hughes' and Echostar's systems, but their Fair Access Policies looked like bandwidth restrictions on what you were already paying for. I was going to stay with dial-up until radio-links came along.

    --
    "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
    1. Re:I Was In Your Shoes by seanmeister · · Score: 3, Informative

      I use a radio-based ISP in southern NM, and it's great. It's advertised as 256kbps, but in practice I get closer to 400kbps, and it's only $50/month.

      My only complaints have been the price of the hardware (Alvarion BreezeAccess II - $1200 from the ISP, or closer to $400 on eBay), and the fact that they tend to go down whenever lighting clobbers the mountain where their antenna is.

    2. Re:I Was In Your Shoes by hairyfeet · · Score: 1
      I went with Hughes.Yes,The FAP sucks.The problem i had with WiFi(and I'm sure it'll apply to WiMax too)is that with a new tech like that,Especially being set up in a rural area,Is that your service is only as good as the system admin is smart

      I gave up on WiFi after i was disconnected after my twelve year old nephew crashed their server and disconnected the whole area.Was he a master hacker?Nope-His little Java chat app crashed and started to suck up more ports.Instead of having ANY kind of limits on ports they had set up their server in a way that my nephews chat app was able to suck up all the ports and overload the server.

      The very next week they fixed that only for me to find everyone who was connected to their server in "My Network Places" with their name and password clearly visible!That is when i gave up on WiFi.

      The problem is the big companies don't care about the small rural places and the little local start ups that do often hire inept system admins for their system.I personally have given up on decent broadband until someone like Google offers national WiFi.Come ooon,Google!!

      I truly wish you luck,Because you are going to need it.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    3. Re:I Was In Your Shoes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Err...I think he means 256kbps. (Kilobits)

    4. Re:I Was In Your Shoes by geomon · · Score: 1

      I've been pretty lucky. The folks who set me up are the local public utility district. They already handled internet services to the federal energy supplier in our region. Setting up their residential/small business ISP went fairly smoothly. The techs vary in skill level, but what they lack in skill to their more urban counterparts they more than make up in tenacity. They never stop working on a problem until it is completely solved.

      This is in comparison to my brother's last job where the network engineers at a large metropolitian ISP just quit working on something when it started working again. The system magic-ed itself back in to operation and they weren't going to monkey with it. The problem would periodically reoccur, but they made no extraordinary effort to troubleshoot the problem. If it ain't broke....

      My current ISP techs are getting better as they work the system. I was one of their first customers and have been with them for nearly two years. This second year has been the best service yet - better than all of the dial up accounts I've ever used, rural or urban. That is what makes moving to a new ISP a difficult prospect.

      Despite tripling my bandwidth, I may be a guinea pig again.

      --
      "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
    5. Re:I Was In Your Shoes by StromgBad · · Score: 1

      I was on dialup for years (i live in the boondocks), then some local company in town started offering wifi service. ends up i have a full T1 (1500kbit up and down) for the price of what people pay for cable and dsl in town (~$40/month).

    6. Re:I Was In Your Shoes by geomon · · Score: 1

      You suck. ;)

      A guy I went to high school with works for a cable company. He gets all the stations (premium included) and full bandwidth internet (we clocked it at 2mbps on dslreports) for about what I pay for satellite TV.

      Some folks get all the luck.

      --
      "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
    7. Re:I Was In Your Shoes by furrywithwings · · Score: 1

      Can I move? $40 for full t1? :)

  2. I know there's nothing for me to see here. by mpathetiq · · Score: 3, Funny

    It IS wireless after all.

  3. Right Now! by USSJoin · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WiMax Seems to think that it's already out... http://www.towerstream.com/ should already be serving it.

    1. Re:Right Now! by Nos. · · Score: 5, Informative

      There is no equipment *today* that is certified to be WiMax. Everything we're seeing right now is "Pre-WiMax". This is equipment that will probably pass certification, but hasn't yet. The certification lab just started accepting equipment for test a couple months back. The belief is that by the end of the year we'll see some actual certified hardware available. See wimaxforum.org - the official wimax site.

    2. Re:Right Now! by sraasch · · Score: 1

      Well... maybe not: http://www.towerstream.com/content.asp?servicearea s seems to suggest that this provider doesn't even know where PA *is*!

    3. Re:Right Now! by bani · · Score: 2, Informative

      wimaxforum is hilarious. out of the 100's of parties registered as a "wimax forum member", only 4 or 5 are even working on actual product.

      what is funny is that the wimax forum was predicting shipping products in _2004_. then they bumped it up to 2005. it's now the latter part of 2005 and they still haven't even finished testing. every wimax vendor I have talked to says 1H 2006, some are even saying 2H 2006.

      as for deploying this stuff yourself right now -- forget it. you need an FCC license to do so. maybe in a year or two they will have stuff which operates in unlicensed bands, but right now and the immediate future -- no.

      all current testing is taking place outside north america in asia and other countries where licensing is lax or nonexistent.

    4. Re:Right Now! by scbysnx · · Score: 2, Informative

      testing starts in october and we will see the first certified wi-max equipment in 06

  4. Wi-Max by matth · · Score: 5, Informative

    The ISP I work for which is in Williamsport will be deploying Wi-Max Alvarion gear shortly. However, I don't know that that's really going to help you in remote PA. The problem being remote is even Wi-Max probably will not hit you here in the hilly areas. We use some 900mhz stuff and it works well through trees... but hit a mountain and you don't have a chance. Plus in most areas like that it just isn't cost effective to build out to hit 1 or 4 people.

    1. Re:Wi-Max by lucabrasi999 · · Score: 1
      The ISP I work for which is in Williamsport will be deploying Wi-Max Alvarion gear shortly. However, I don't know that that's really going to help you in remote PA.

      Funny. I thought Williamsport WAS remote PA.

    2. Re:Wi-Max by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The problem with 900mhz stuff nowadays is the huge amount of noise in adjacent bands, not to mention the crap being spewed from cordless phones and the like. The non-line-of-site benefits of 900mhz band are being undone. I remember some of our equipment having major interference problems because some paging tower's transmitter went on the fritz and started spewing like nuts, and the big guys just don't give a damn. 2.4ghz is getting nearly as bad, and the higher unlicensed bands will doubtless in turn also begin to suffer.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    3. Re:Wi-Max by matth · · Score: 1

      That's why you deploy frequency hopping. Come across a bad channel, or channels? Just hop over it... Decreases your available bandwidth by a bit, but you continue to run just fine.

    4. Re:Wi-Max by Skye16 · · Score: 1

      Not even close. There are people there. As in "more than 1".

      Try some place like Renovo, or Snow Shoe.

    5. Re:Wi-Max by lowrydr310 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I was shocked to learn this past weekend that DSL is availble at my parents' house in BFE Pennsylvania. My father just signed up for Verizon's 768/384 DSL, which is cheaper than the dialup service he had!

      Meanwhile, DSL is NOT available where I live in relatively Suburban NJ (not rural) approximately 20 miles outside New York City. My house was built in 1995 and my parents' house was built sometime before 1895, and I would have expected that I could get it first.

      For now I'm stuck paying out the ears for Comcast's monopoly Cable internet. I can't complain about the speed or service, but DSL if available would be 1/4 the price. Verizon says "were constantly upgrading our network and expanding our coverage. We'll contact you when DSL is available in your area!"

    6. Re:Wi-Max by Basehart · · Score: 1

      I just looked at Snow Shoe on Google Earth - yep, it's pretty remote.

    7. Re:Wi-Max by matth · · Score: 1

      LOL.. Perhaps more remote then say Pittsburgh... but Wellsboro, or Ralston are remote PA :)

    8. Re:Wi-Max by alc6379 · · Score: 1
      Maybe you're in the same situation as I am.

      I live less than 10 miles outside of Nashville, TN. I know it's not a New York City, but it's considered a decent size metropolis. I can sit on my roof and read the words on the skyscrapers.

      ...but I'm out of range for DSL by about 200 feet. It's all about where the CO's positioned, and I just fell right outside the threshold for service. I checked this 3-4 years ago initially, and got the same message as you from Bellsouth-- "We're constantly upgrading our service! BlahBlahBlah". Here we are now, still no luck.

      Don't hold your breath, I say. Just enjoy the fact that at least you're not on dial-up anymore...

      --
      I don't moderate anymore. Karma penalty for 90% fair mods? Can I mod that unfair?
    9. Re:Wi-Max by Thrakkerzog · · Score: 1

      My Grandma just got DSL, and she lives pretty far away in Sandy Lake, PA. I'm less then a mile from Allentown, and I can't get DSL or two-way cable.

    10. Re:Wi-Max by Raistlin77 · · Score: 1

      If you think you're paying out your ears for Comcast, you need to re-check your pricing on Verizon. Verizon DSL 3.0M/768K is $37.95/mo plus a $39.95 "modem-fee". The same speed on Comcast is $42.95/mo plus $3.00/mo if you need to lease a modem. At a $5.00 differencem which becomes only $2.00 in the first year when you figure in the modem (of course, BYOM is always better), I hardly see how Verizon could possibly be 1/4 of the price of Comcast.

      You also need to account for the fact that to even get DSL in the first place, you have to have a working phone line. At least with Comcast, you can get service without having cable-tv - it's just $15.00/mo more, which is less expensive than any phone line from a bell that I've ever seen.

    11. Re:Wi-Max by jonbrewer · · Score: 1

      "Meanwhile, DSL is NOT available where I live in relatively Suburban NJ (not rural) approximately 20 miles outside New York City. My house was built in 1995 and my parents' house was built sometime before 1895, and I would have expected that I could get it first."

      There was a brief time in the 1990s when neighborhoods and apartment buildings were served via fibre to the curb - with head-end equipment completely incompatible with DSL. The equipment works just fine with voice, the last mile or inch is nice clean copper that will work fine with DSL, but the critical backhaul bit isn't right. It will likely take a pile of mini-DSLAMs to get your neighborhood up and running, and the telco might not see value in doing it. On the upside, you may be the first in your area to get ADSL2.

    12. Re:Wi-Max by bani · · Score: 1

      the problem is almost everything else in that band frequency hops too. so when something goes on the fritz it kills the whole band.

    13. Re:Wi-Max by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Frequency hopping is only going to be of limited value where the noise floor is too high or someone's transmitter goes nuts. Of course, it all depends on what you're doing and (particularly) where you're doing it.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    14. Re:Wi-Max by vegetto · · Score: 1

      Wellsboro is covered by blue ridge cable, i know you should be able to get cable atleast.

    15. Re:Wi-Max by walt-sjc · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not if his telco is Verizon.

      Verizone has declared DSL dead. It's Fios now... Basically, nobody (or near enough to nobody for the sake of this conversation) is doing "extended reach" DSL or adding new DSLAMS. If you can get DSL now, great. If not, don't hold your breath. You options are Fios sometime in the next 10 - 20 years or WiMAX in the next 5.

      One other option may be to find someone else who CAN get DSL and has line of sight to your house. Do a WiFi bridge. Offer them "free" internet for the use of their house / business. Technically this may violate AUP, but screw em.

    16. Re:Wi-Max by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      You can get a T1?

      Set up your own ISP, and resell what you don't use.

    17. Re:Wi-Max by matth · · Score: 1

      This is true... ahh PenTeleData... used to work there doing Tech Support... now moved up and do network administration at another ISP.

    18. Re:Wi-Max by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      The 768K/128K Verizon DSL plan is only $15/month. Sure, it's not anywhere near as fast as it could be, but it's a lot faster than dialup (down, anyway), and it's always on.

    19. Re:Wi-Max by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      Heh, my girlfriend's parents just had DSL made available to them; they get it this week. And it's coming to my apartment on September 30th. About a mile south of here they've got Fios.

      Oh yeah, this is Verizon.

    20. Re:Wi-Max by vegetto · · Score: 1

      Ah, i too once worked for PTD, until about a month ago that is. Lets put it this way....lets hope you dont need tech support. Its gone wayyyy down hill from what is was when i started up there.

    21. Re:Wi-Max by balloonpup · · Score: 1

      Hmmm... Allentown, and an indirect point toward one-way cable. RCN customer are we?

      --
      I sing the doggie electric!
    22. Re:Wi-Max by bcattwoo · · Score: 1

      Damn Bellsouth. Cheapest DSL (256K/128K) is $27.95 including their "cost recovery fee".

    23. Re:Wi-Max by furrywithwings · · Score: 1

      What's the deal with FIOS? Is this more of that 'pppoe" sign on shit? or is it really a real always-con-connection? that deesn't require me to fuck with MTU settings and crap? I've heard good things, but how does it compare, really?

    24. Re:Wi-Max by Thrakkerzog · · Score: 1

      Yep. The newer section of the neighborhood has two-way cable, but not the older section.

      I just hope that verizon lays some fiber through here for FIOS.

    25. Re:Wi-Max by balloonpup · · Score: 1

      As a former tech support rep for them, I have to appologize for the quality of such service. Man, they're awful. Good luck with Verizon, because while RCN was interested in upgrading (they don't like the one-ways either, too many problems), they're not that motivated

      --
      I sing the doggie electric!
  5. Re:Background by lucabrasi999 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Why did you just link to the same Wikipedia article that the submitterr linked to?

  6. Reminds me of DSL by ackthpt · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Back in the early days of DSL in the Bay Area (SFO/OAK/SJC) there was a guide in the now-defunct MicroTimes outlining about 40 vendors and what they offered. It was a bit exasperating trying to figure out which to buy into. Sounds like WiMAX is going to have a shaking out period, too.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Reminds me of DSL by capnal · · Score: 1

      Did the DSL shaking-out period ever end!?

    2. Re:Reminds me of DSL by ackthpt · · Score: 1
      Did the DSL shaking-out period ever end!?

      By default, I gather, as many went out of business with the .com bubble burst fallout. Still, I was initially under the impression there was one kind of DSL and found the offerings, beyond bandwidth, included various communications standards or even brand names. Now it's pretty much down to a couple of choices, not based upon any technical merit, but because they survived.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    3. Re:Reminds me of DSL by Thundersnatch · · Score: 1

      The shaking-out period ended a long time ago. At least in Chicago, Illinois, USA.

      I have lived in 5 different apartments and condos since 1998, and I've had multiple DSL and cable internet choices in all of them. I've used Earthlink, SBC, and Speakeasy DSL. As well as my current RCN cable. All providers worked with no real problems, and with ~2 week installation. I kept switching to get the "new subscriber" deals each time I moved.

      My only problems were not really DSL-technology related. For about three months Eathlink's POP was totally over-subscribed (the 3rd hop router was the culprit). And other than Speakeasy, it took a lot of holding to get a real, live person on the phone to talk about billing or what-not. But DSL works, in this major metro at least.

      Plus, there's actually some competition in the market. Brandbandreports.com lists 18 DSL (!) and 2 cable providers that service my address.

  7. It's not just a matter of cards... by jafo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's not just a matter of getting WiMax cards as the person asking the question seems to think. It's a matter of getting the cards and routers *AND* having a service provider cover your area. If you don't currently have a provider offering terresterial wireless or DSL/cable, WiMax isn't going to change that at all.

    You do have a few options though. Move, of course... Or, if there's demand in your area, start up an ISP or cooperative. If there isn't demand for at least 10 people, you now know why nobody is offering it in your area. ;-/

    Sean

    1. Re:It's not just a matter of cards... by Nos. · · Score: 1

      If you don't currently have a provider offering terresterial wireless or DSL/cable, WiMax isn't going to change that at all.
      The exciting thing about WiMax is that it can provide high speed (50Mbps+) over long distances (tested at over 60 miles). So, yes, you'll still need coverage, but providers won't have to put nearly as many access points as they would with WiFi or have to lay the cable they would for DSL/cable.

    2. Re:It's not just a matter of cards... by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 4, Informative

      WiMax can provide high speed (50Mbps+) over long distances (tested at over 60 miles).

      No, it can provide high speed or long distance, but not both at the same time. For really large sectors that will be used in rural areas, expect 10Mbps or less total throughput.

    3. Re:It's not just a matter of cards... by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      Evem 5 or 3 or 1Mbit would be wonderful for people living with dial-up still.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    4. Re:It's not just a matter of cards... by Feyr · · Score: 2, Interesting

      im not sure what equipment you're looking at, but so far all i've seen if "high speed over short distance, crap speed over medium distance"

      i have yet to see any equipment, pre-wimax or other, that boast 60 miles

      right now we've got some motorala canopy, the docs says they do 10 miles with a reflector and 4 without (did anyway, they just updated them). in reality you're lucky to be doing 5 miles with a reflector, i'm sure the wimax crap will be the same (in the 5.7ghz band)

    5. Re:It's not just a matter of cards... by joshjoneswas · · Score: 1

      So you mean on a bad day when even one of those spaceships like in Independence Day or War of the Worlds comes through my line of sight... it will still be better than Comcast in Nashville? :)

  8. Ask Google? by Cardoe · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now I know I'm going to get smacked down for this... But seriously... some of the Ask Slashdot sounds like Ask Google.

    1. Re:Ask Google? by jasongetsdown · · Score: 1

      looks like saying you're going to get smacked down isn't always enough to avoid being smacked down.

      --
      useless sig advice - Read Nabokov.
    2. Re:Ask Google? by SlayerofGods · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yah it does.... but why would you pay someone on Google Answers to find the answer for you when you have 1,000s of people here that will do it for free?

      --

      Technology, the cause of and solution to all of life's problems.
    3. Re:Ask Google? by m50d · · Score: 1

      With all the "google CEO sneezes" type stories we get here, the submitter could be forgiven for thinking they're the same thing.

      --
      I am trolling
    4. Re:Ask Google? by flithm · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're right it does, but it's an interesting question, one that I wouldn't have thought about enough to google myself.

      Plus the thing about google is, all it does is find published articles, and most of it is marketing hype.

      When you ask slashdot, you're asking because you want to know the geekly opinion, which is often quite a bit different, easier, and less annoying, than spending hours wading through internet fluff.

  9. BFE MI by mrycar · · Score: 3, Informative

    I live in BFE Michigan. I have the same problem, but luckily live near a major interstate highway (I69). WIMAX is being considered along the entire stretch and is seen as one of the few hopes to get reasonable rate broadband access by the communities around me.

    Even so, the earliest estimate for me is around 2 years until it is ready. Until then, it looks like Cingular will have its edge network in place, and it will be a likely alternative. Although it looks like it will be 8 months until the EDGe network is in place here.

    --
    Gator/Claria is Spyware.
    1. Re:BFE MI by dustinbarbour · · Score: 1
      but luckily live near a major interstate highway (I69)

      ...and therefore you do not live in Butt-Fucking Egypt. You live near a major interstate freeway replete with offramps and everything. Hell, you probably have a gas station!

    2. Re:BFE MI by literfizzer · · Score: 1

      The Cinglular EDGE network is up and running nationwide now, but gives max download speeds of only approx. 160 kbit/sec. Sometime in 2006, Cingular will supposedly roll out HSPDA nationwide, which is an upgrade of the UMTS network that AT&T Wireless deployed in a handful of metros before being acquired by Cingular. HSPDA will supposedly allow for downloads bursting up to 2.4 mbit/sec, though typical speeds will probably be quite a bit lower than that.

      Alternatively, you could look at Verizon's EV-DO network, which is online in many cities now and supposedly gives download speeds in the 400-700 kbit/sec range.

  10. It is solidly standardized in fixed mode by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 5, Informative

    It is solidly standardized in fixed mode in IEEE 802.16-2004. Products are in the pipeline from a number of manufacturers.

    What is at issue is whether service providers will set up in your area. This is a very complex issue where spectrum policy and licensing collide with equipment availability, local permits (for towers etc), the cost of the technology and competition from DSL and cable. I don't pretend to know how it will pan out, but 2006 will be the year that the market gets effectively tested.

    The current work is around mobility which relates more to handsets and laptops. This not only in the unfinished 802.16e spec, but in Wimax and the IETF, since for mobility, the backhaul networks need to be standardized and this is outside the realm of the 802.16 working group. Mobility will take some time.

    --
    Evil people are out to get you.
  11. It's coming, Just a little bit longer (months) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Clearwire is rolling out ALOT of new sites in this coming year. They're up to about 15 right now and growing at a rate of something like 2 every 3 weeks. I think Seattle is on the schedule really soon. The tough part is getting the expensive licenses for airwaves.

    But you can't beat the pricing for that kind of mobility in broadband.

    Speakeasy has a WiMax setup on the Space Needle in Seattle, but the range only covers the north side of downtown. They are planning on rolling out more too, but I've seen less proof.
    www.clearwire.com /Not a shill, but soon to be a CW customer when Seattle goes live.

    1. Re:It's coming, Just a little bit longer (months) by the_maddman · · Score: 2, Informative
      Except ClearWire for all the money they got to promote WiMax, is CMDA2000. If you read their stuff, they are using "WiMax like" technology.

      I haven't seen anything WiMax that's real. It's a marketing thing that's gotten out of hand.

      On the other hand, I did get to play with Clearwire's gear, and it does actually work pretty well. Their TOS is evil though, read it carefully.

    2. Re:It's coming, Just a little bit longer (months) by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The tough part is getting the expensive licenses for airwaves.

      I think that Clearwire is buying up everything that is available for a reasonable price. They aren't going where there is the best market, but where the cost of entry is low enough. If you look at where they are going, they are in a lot of places people have heard of, but aren't large cities. All the large cities have had the licenses bought by the big guys, and the smallest places won't bring the income, so the medium market is what Clearwire is aiming for.

    3. Re:It's coming, Just a little bit longer (months) by Flagg0204 · · Score: 1

      I think clearwire is definately a company to keep your eye on. Seeing as how Craig McCaugh is the guy heading up this little venture, I would bet they are going to do pretty well. He has many contacts within the wireless industry from his AT&T Wireless (McCaugh Comm) days and he seems to have a nack for creating succesfull startups. That is, until he sells them off.

  12. Re:Verizon commercials by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's 1xRTT and EV-DO, not WiMax.

  13. Move to Seattle or Philadelphia by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 2, Interesting

    or nearby if you want to get this kind of service - that or next to a major university (or state college/university).

    you're more likely to get high-speed service over your power lines out in farm country, IMHO.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:Move to Seattle or Philadelphia by Secrity · · Score: 1

      you're more likely to get high-speed service over your power lines out in farm country, IMHO.

      I personally hope for the best in your endeavor to get broadband services that are compatible with existing licensed services. I sincerely hope that BPL or PLC never happens and that the current pilot programs go down in flames. Putting fiber on powerlines is cool, putting broadband RF on power lines is very uncool as it emits wideband RF radiation that can interfer with other communication services.

    2. Re:Move to Seattle or Philadelphia by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      Damn. I didn't think we had annexed Seattle.

    3. Re:Move to Seattle or Philadelphia by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      No, you annexed Mercer Island. We traded it for Boston. That way we could always win baseball games. Of course, this way you might get WiMAX ...

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  14. Re:Background by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
    Just some background information on B.F.E. for those who aren't sure what this is all about.

    (Look under the section entitled 'Kadigans in the English language for places')

  15. Nagging question about bandwidth by geneing · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I have a question which I haven't seen discussed when it comes to WiMAX. Is there enough radio frequency bandwidth to support more than a few dozen high-speed users per access point?

    As I understand, the promises about the speed of WiMax are based on top speed (i.e. 1 user). Multiple users will have to share the same radio frequency and their connection speed will be lower.

    I remember reading that 4G cell phone network will (with much lower connection speeds) will require on the order of 500MHz of radio spectrum. To put this number in prospective FCC actions slices of 10MHz for billions of $.

    I'm not an expert in radio communications, but I don't see how the numbers (promised connection bandwidth and available radio spectrum) would ever add up. Could someone explain?

    1. Re:Nagging question about bandwidth by dougmc · · Score: 1
      I remember reading that 4G cell phone network will (with much lower connection speeds) will require on the order of 500MHz of radio spectrum. To put this number in prospective FCC actions slices of 10MHz for billions of $.
      Right, but cell phones (and PCS and other phones, even though they distance themselves from `cell' phones) work by using lower power signals that only have to reach a tower a short distance away. Everything is broken up into `cells'.

      So a person over here can be using X amount of bandwidth, and so can a person a few miles away. Dozens of people could be using the same frequency simultaneously in a single city, and tens of thousands could be nationwide.

      I don't know how much bandwidth the 4G phones will require, but I seriously doubt it's 500 MHz for a single connection. But whatever the bandwidth required, many users will be able to use the same slot of bandwidth in a single city.

    2. Re:Nagging question about bandwidth by skillet-thief · · Score: 1
      Right, but cell phones (and PCS and other phones, even though they distance themselves from `cell' phones) work by using lower power signals that only have to reach a tower a short distance away. Everything is broken up into `cells'.

      Also, communications are divided into packets, so you could be using the same frequency as somebody right next to you, but not necessarily at the exact same microsecond.

      --

      Congratulations! Now we are the Evil Empire

    3. Re:Nagging question about bandwidth by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 1

      ISPs often exploit statistical multiplexing with 10:1 or higher oversubscription ratios.

      See http://www.nextgencommunications.net/wisp/2005/07/ oversubscription-or-how-i-watched.html

    4. Re:Nagging question about bandwidth by nicke999 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Dataspeed relates to bandwidth by Shannon's theorem which states that the maximum capacity (C) that can ever be sent over a digital channel is set by: C = bandwidth * log2(1+S/N), where S/N is the signal to noise ratio. That is, double the bandwidth, double the maximum theoretical speed. So, to steal an example from Wikipedia: if the signal to noise ratio is 20 dB and we have 500 Mhz of bandwidth we can transmit at 3 Gbit/s (theoretically at least).

      Also important to understand is that the lower the transmitting frequency, the further the signal will go (given the same transmitter strength). Going from 1 Ghz to 500 Mhz and you double the transmission range without increasing the transmitter strength.

      To make this equation even more difficult, the lower the transmitting frequency, the higher noise level. So in conclusion this means that more bandwidth gives us higher transmission speeds and higher frequnecy gets more expensive since we need more transmitting towers but has low noise levels and therefore acheives higher speeds.

      Hope this explains things!

      --
      Thanks for browsing at -1
      Please vistit my blog: www.framtiden.nu
    5. Re:Nagging question about bandwidth by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I have a question which I haven't seen discussed when it comes to WiMAX. Is there enough radio frequency bandwidth to support more than a few dozen high-speed users per access point?

      The bottom line with any wireless system is how well engineered it is.

      The following techniques help a lot:

      a) broadband suppliers give a 'contention ratio' somewhere between 20 and 50. In other words they assume you are only using it 1/20 to 1/50 of the time. So a single 2M radio link can handle 20-50 customers each with 2M and a 100M radio link can handle 1000-2500 people (in principle.)

      b) directional antennas help a lot. So, if they stick up a mast with antennas pointing in different directions (adjacent antennas on different frequencies) then they'll get very little contention.

      c) nodes that don't 'shout'; in other words if the nodes don't transmit at any more power than they absolutely need to; this minimises the distance that any interference is likely to occur at; permitting channel reuse.

      d) add base stations, (particularly in conjunction with c) ) this mean that each base station can transmit and receive at lower power- this reduces the size of the coverage area, and you gain multiple times the users (since each node only uses up the bandwidth for a smaller distance).

      e) use different channels (each channel has its own customers on)

      f) node routing (in other words, instead of a customer sending a signal all the way to the base station, route it through another customer that is closer).

      If you use all these techniques appropriately, the amount of bandwidth per user is constant, independent of the number of users, surprisingly.

      --

      -WolfWithoutAClause

      "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
    6. Re:Nagging question about bandwidth by geneing · · Score: 1
      Also important to understand is that the lower the transmitting frequency, the further the signal will go (given the same transmitter strength). Going from 1 Ghz to 500 Mhz and you double the transmission range without increasing the transmitter strength.

      You actually want exactly the opposite. You want to reuse the same frequency as much as possible, so you want relatively short range.

      By the way, don't you find it mindboggling that a tiny cell phone with the maximum output of 2W and omnidirectional antenna can transmit to a tower 20-30 and, as was reported, over 100 miles away.

    7. Re:Nagging question about bandwidth by geneing · · Score: 1

      Great link! I knew someone already though of that question. However, I read the article and the writer questions the assumptions and suggests that a 20MHz channel you can probably support about 1000 users, which proves my point.

    8. Re:Nagging question about bandwidth by dougmc · · Score: 1
      Also important to understand is that the lower the transmitting frequency, the further the signal will go (given the same transmitter strength). Going from 1 Ghz to 500 Mhz and you double the transmission range without increasing the transmitter strength.
      That is grossly oversimplified.

      If you reduce the frequency and keep the power (and gain of the antenna) constant, the amplitude of the signal will go up, but it's not really the amplitude that matters when picking up a signal. Really, it's the background noise that's the limiting factor -- the S/N ratio, as you've already mentioned. As long as the power stays the same, and the noise level stays the same, the S/N ratio will be the same.

      And I don't think you'd double the transmission range by halving the frequency. Assuming that the amplitude was what mattered and not the power (which I don't agree with), I'd expect a 41% increase (sqrt(2)) assuming you're not running into problems with line of sight or attenuation in the air and the like.

      To make this equation even more difficult, the lower the transmitting frequency, the higher noise level.
      That might work as a rule of thumb, but it's pretty rough.
    9. Re:Nagging question about bandwidth by ecloud · · Score: 1
      Also important to understand is that the lower the transmitting frequency, the further the signal will go (given the same transmitter strength). Going from 1 Ghz to 500 Mhz and you double the transmission range without increasing the transmitter strength.

      As someone else pointed out this is really way oversimplified. And in practice the reasons that lower frequencies go longer distances has more to do with side effects of the environment. For example HF signals will bounce off the ionosphere and come back to earth, whereas VHF and higher will go on out into space. And the higher the frequency, the more likely it is to be blocked by some physical substance. This is why they use ultra-low frequencies to communicate with subs underwater - anything much higher just doesn't travel through water very well. At high enough frequencies even a single sheet of paper can be opaque. (Just as it can be opaque to light.)

      Anyway Shannon's equation that you posted does not have a frequency component at all.

  16. BFE fo' life by brandor · · Score: 5, Informative

    Our small town has been a testbed for WiMax for the past year or so. So far everything seems to be working well and the price hasn't been bad either. 29.99 for standard bandwidth. So far the only limitation I've seen is ling of sight. But, that should be remedied soon, as the operator is moving his towers to the mountain tops. (Why they didn't do this to begin with, I'll never know.) Verizon is the one providing the testing and everything. www.verizonavenue.com is the webpage (I *think*)

    1. Re:BFE fo' life by isd_glory · · Score: 1

      I have the VZ avenue service. Personally I find it a little overpriced for the bandwidth, but given that DSL and Cable aren't options (crap wiring in my area), its the only game in town.

      Aside from occasional lag spikes (400-1000 ms), generally there are no issues.

  17. MOD PARENT INSIGHTFUL! (Plus link) by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 2, Informative

    Here's a link I found on google, entitled "WiMAX News, Events and Training"

    http://www.intel.com/netcomms/events/wimax.htm

  18. Re:butt fuck egypt? by Alex+P+Keaton+in+da · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The Butt F%^K isn't anything to do with it. BFE is an old term that stood fof "Beyond F-ing Egypt." It meant really far away, as it does today. I am sure this will get modded offtopic, but BFE will be used a lot in replies to this story...
    Now- do you know what RFD stands for, as in Mayberry?

    --
    And All I Ask is a Tall Ship And a Star to Steer Her By
  19. Verizon Covers Almost All of PA by Doug+Dante · · Score: 3, Informative


    Look at the nationwide map. It looks like most, if not all, of PA is covered with Verizon wireless high speed intnernet ($59/month+regular cell - unlimited - 400Kbps-800Kbps with 2Mbps bursting).

    http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/mobileoptions/b roadband/mappage.jsp?city=Pittsburgh&state=PA&i_na me=pa_pitts

    It may not be WiMax, but it gets the job done.

    Also, if you can find someone within line of sight who has DSL or Cable modem, you can roll your own point to point wireless network pretty easilly, even with plain old 802.11a/b/g.

    --
    The world will not get better through technology. We must seek to be better people.
    1. Re:Verizon Covers Almost All of PA by jimwelch · · Score: 1

      >> "Also, if you can find someone within line of sight who has DSL or Cable modem, you can roll your own point to point wireless network pretty easilly, even with plain old 802.11a/b/g."

      Better check the terms of service, my cable company (cableone.net) forbids the sharing of their internet connection.

      --
      Never trust a man wearing a coat and tie!
    2. Re:Verizon Covers Almost All of PA by Nova1313 · · Score: 1

      hahaha verizon covering all of PA is a joke. I live in a major city in PA, off a major road. For 3 years they have been telling me both over the phone and the web that their highspeed service is availiable here.. Now call to sign up they will sign you up. But when they get out to my house they go no it's definately not avialiable here. We don't know why we said it was.. Bad expieriences *shakes*

      --
      There exists some positive integer N that you are the Nth person to read this signature.
    3. Re:Verizon Covers Almost All of PA by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      What your cable company doesn't know...

    4. Re:Verizon Covers Almost All of PA by Thrakkerzog · · Score: 1

      Re-read that. Pennsylvania is hardly covered. The BroadbandAccess and V CAST is only available in large cities. The NationalAccess is available in a much larger area, but only offers 60-80 kbps with 144kbps burst. 60-80kbps for $60/month on top of a cell charge is not worth it.

    5. Re:Verizon Covers Almost All of PA by gklyber · · Score: 1

      National Access is included in the America's Choice plans >=$39.95. 60-80kbps is a bit slow, but it's usually better than dialup except for the latency. No extra fees; just google around a bit.

    6. Re:Verizon Covers Almost All of PA by bumski · · Score: 1

      No need for sharing. If the service is available there, he can arrange for service to be installed in his name at a friend's house and close his personal last mile himself. That's how I'd do it if it were one of my bandwidth-hogging, porn-fiend friends who wanted to arrange for service at my house. But I'd look at leasing a bare pair, aka "alarm line", rather than wireless.

      Not that any of this matters to the OP, who probably has to drive an hour to get into an area with service.

    7. Re:Verizon Covers Almost All of PA by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      Also, if you can find someone within line of sight who has DSL or Cable modem, you can roll your own point to point wireless network pretty easilly, even with plain old 802.11a/b/g.

      Line of sight is pretty difficult if you don't live in the desert, and even then "pretty easily" is somewhat of an overstatment, especially if you want to do it legally.

    8. Re:Verizon Covers Almost All of PA by siplus · · Score: 1

      I live in PA... there is nothing close to state-wide wireless

  20. This message sent via WiMax by TrippTDF · · Score: 4, Funny

    My office in NYC uses WiMax. We upgraded earlier this year and we've had great uptime, and good speed. The cool thing is that the transmitter we connect to is on the Empire State Building. When I connect to the VPN from home, I can look out the window at the ESB and see my data flying through the air...

    1. Re:This message sent via WiMax by fm6 · · Score: 4, Funny
      I can look out the window at the ESB and see my data flying through the air...
      I suggest you cut back on the all-nighters!
    2. Re:This message sent via WiMax by TrippTDF · · Score: 1

      Ironicly, I gave my two weeks notice this morning....

  21. Re:Background by marktwen0 · · Score: 1

    Thanks. Very helpful.

  22. BFE, MS by Ridge · · Score: 3, Informative

    I live in BFE, MS and like the poster have no choice for broadband. Today, I had a couple guys come out and install a WildBlue satellite, they just finished about a half hour ago. It seems pretty nice, I get about 1.5Mbps downstream and 256Kbps upstream says some random bandwidth tester. The latency is pretty painful, I got ~650ms pinging google. The 'Pro' version of this provider is 1.5Mbps/256Kbps for $79 a month, 22GB/6GB fair access policy. My initial opinion is that it rocks when your only choice is nothing or dialup, *if* you can live with the latency. I went a month or two without a connection after moving from Memphis with a cable connection, it's kind of tough. So this is a pretty sizable improvement over nothing. I hope by this time next year to start seeing some WiMax deployments, but I don't expect to see any before then. :(

    1. Re:BFE, MS by Tx · · Score: 1

      Today, I had a couple guys come out and install a WildBlue satellite, they just finished about a half hour ago.

      Wait, you get a satellite to yourself? And shouldn't they be launching it, not installing it at your house?

      --
      Oh no... it's the future.
    2. Re:BFE, MS by leighklotz · · Score: 1

      Where is BFE, MS? Is it near Hot Coffee? Mars Hill? Bugue Chitto? Bude? Eupora?

  23. Re:Verizon commercials by rjstanford · · Score: 1

    Kinda worthless, IMO, if you couldn't do something like play a steady game of WoW while riding a bus.

    Unless, as the original poster posited, its a broadband alternative where previously there was none. I'd call that pretty un-worthless but, hey, that's just me.

    --
    You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
  24. Re:butt fuck egypt? by lucabrasi999 · · Score: 1

    Well, RFD either means "Request for Development" or "Rural Free Delivery". I'll take the latter for $200.

  25. Standardized but not necessarily interoperable by PCM2 · · Score: 1

    The standards may be fully-baked but it's still possible for different vendors to interpret the language of the standard differently. This happened with Wi-Fi and it may happen with WiMax. One proposed solution is to do a labeling program, like what happened with Wi-Fi. The WiMax Forum wants vendors to submit their products to it for interoperability testing. If they pass, they get to put the official WiMax Forum label on their product packaging. However, not one single product has completed this interoperability testing to date. You see products with a generic "WiMax" label on them, but they just slapped that on there themselves, without any kind of independent verification. There's no guarantee that one brand of hardware is going to work with another.

    --
    Breakfast served all day!
    1. Re:Standardized but not necessarily interoperable by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      The extent to which this matters depends on the type of deployment. For mobile systems it matters a lot, it matters for systems where different parties own each end of the link, it matter when they sell this stuff in comp-usa.

      It matters a lot less when the user or service provider owns both ends of the link and can thus verify interoperability ahead of time.

      Interoperability labelling does matter in certain scenarios, but compare the timeline of Wimax interop testing against what happened in the Bluetooth Sig or the WiFi Alliance (aka WECA). They are very comparable and consistent with BT and WiFi, it takes time from the initial products coming out to the interop testing to get into full swing.

      There is reason to think it's not going to be a worst case scenario. There are a very limited number of silicon vendors. Many products will be based on the same silicon with the same software. This will lead to default profiles pretty quickly.

      --
      Evil people are out to get you.
  26. Re:butt fuck egypt? by kwerle · · Score: 1

    Welcome, visitor from another dimension. It turns out that in THIS dimension, words and acronyms can change meaning over time.

  27. Re:Completely offtopic, but... which OS does host by geomon · · Score: 1

    Try netcraft.com.

    --
    "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
  28. Fixed vs. Mobile performance by RradRegor · · Score: 5, Informative

    One thing to keep in mind when considering this is the huge difference between a fixed high-gain antenna and a mobile device. I did some work for a company that deployed MANs via 30Ghz point-to-multipoint systems using a proprietary QPSK physical layer. It had very similar performance to what WiMax seems to be talking about, but when you think wireless these days, you think of toting your laptop around anywhere and getting connected. Although our system was a very different protocol and modulation method, the laws of physics dictate that your reliable speed is going to depend on the energy per bit transmitted and the combined gain of the two antenna systems. In other words, a mobile device isn't going to have the kind of range and speed people are hearing about WRT WiMax.

    1. Re:Fixed vs. Mobile performance by JVert · · Score: 1

      Thats good to know. But i'm actually interested in how old the kid is and what games you like to play. Also whats your favorite breed of dog?

  29. Re:butt fuck egypt? by winkydink · · Score: 2, Informative

    Going back to my military days in the late 70's, it was BumFvck, Egypt. I never heard anybody say Beyond Egypt.

    --

    "I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey

  30. There is Hope... BPL by mitchdbx · · Score: 2, Informative

    The FCC recently approved the use of BPL, Broadband over Power Line.... This will allow the most remote users to get High Speed internet! There are a few kinks to work out still, but the technology is there, and ready to roll. We have to make the HAM ops happy first ;) Check it out here... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadband_over_power_ line

    1. Re:There is Hope... BPL by finkployd · · Score: 2, Informative

      Really, because everything I have seen indicates that it will cost more to deploy BPL to remote locations than Cable or DSL. I guess I just don't see the point in promoting something that is more expensive than the existing alternatives, and seems to have serious fundamental technical issues to boot.

      Finkployd

  31. Given upcoming oil issues... by NaruVonWilkins · · Score: 2, Insightful

    and the availability of competing services in closer, have you considered moving into an area with better services?

  32. Re:Verizon commercials by ChiChiCuervo · · Score: 1

    you forget:

    A) it's not WiMax, it's EVDO

    B) it's VERIZON, where they mumble under their breath "we feel like" after "anywhere"

    C) Can you screw me over now? Good!

  33. Re:Background by Yocto+Yotta · · Score: 1, Funny

    In case Slashdot is Slashdotted, here is the text of the newspost for your convenience:

    Posted by Cliff on Monday September 12, @11:20AM
    from the last-mile-broadcast-broadband dept.
    PalletBoy asks: "I live in BFE (read 'remote') Pennsylvania where BroadBand is not available in any form save satellite, which is no good for price and latency reasons (curse my MMO addiction!). My big question is: what is the -actual- current status of WiMAX technology? Different sites have me believing different things and I can't find an exact answer to the question 'When will I be able to buy a WiMAX router and cards so I can remotely receive broadband?' When will WiMAX (802.16) be solidly standardized, out, and affordable? Or is it already there?"

    Hopefully that helps save Slashdot's bandwidth for more news of the same importance.

    --
    A B A C A B B
  34. State of the WiMax by Erich · · Score: 4, Informative
    I think you'll start to see slow adoption Real Soon Now (next few years). However, there's a big question about spectrum. WiMax vendor folks can buy up spectrum like wireless carriers, but that is expensive. They can use bands that don't require licensing (like your 802.11 devices), but (potentially) you'll get lots of interference.

    Also, there is really no unity on spectrum for WiMax stuff yet. For 802.11b, for instance, most devices today work in that 2.4Ghz band, so devices are all compatible. Not so much for 802.16, last I saw there were lots of frequencies that could be used, in both licensed and unlicensed spectrum spaces. And it's unlikely that a device you'll get will have antenna systems designed for every possible allowed 802.16 frequency... which I'd wager means that you will likely need to buy hardware that matches your vendor.

    I think for the near term, you should see if you have either WCDMA or CDMA 1xEV-DO rev A data coverage in your area. EV-DO has decent bandwith, and DO rev A really reduces latency and increases reverse link bandwith. As a bonus, you should be able to use the service in most major populated areas... You might have to shell out bucks though. For DO rev A, Sprint and Verizon already own the spectrum, and are starting to roll out these services. The GSM folks are switching to WCDMA, but I don't know the state of their data services. My experience is that GPRS/EDGE doesn't have very good data rates in real life... youll want to stick with the 3G data standards.

    Or, if you are lucky, you might find a smaller service provider that uses directional 802.11 in your area.. that might work reasonably well.

    --

    -- Erich

    Slashdot reader since 1997

    1. Re:State of the WiMax by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      Just out of curiosity, what is the latency like on EV-DO and EV-DO Rev A?

      Pinging www.slashdot.org [66.35.250.151] with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 66.35.250.151: bytes=32 time=342ms TTL=46 Reply from 66.35.250.151: bytes=32 time=283ms TTL=46 Reply from 66.35.250.151: bytes=32 time=298ms TTL=46 Reply from 66.35.250.151: bytes=32 time=278ms TTL=46

      Verizon Wireless Broadband Access, Tampa, Florida.

  35. Do tractors need WiMAX? by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    well, you have to admit it would be useful to put WiMAX where there's sufficient demand - it's possible you might find a trial service set up by a university in farm country, where there might be less interference, but the demand is mostly in densely populated areas.

    Hence my comment that proximity to a state college or university might mean you can get the service. Otherwise, the economics just wouldn't work.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  36. 3 perspectives: Provider, User, Observer by lpoulsen · · Score: 5, Informative

    WiMax is pretty well standardized from the perspective of protocols and modulations, but unlike WiFi which is developed for use in unlicensed bands, WiMax is primarily intended for use by network operators who will have licensed bands. (There will be some gear available for use in the 5.8GHz unlicensed band, but that is a small fraction of the market.

    In North America, the main deployments are expected to be in the 2.5GHz "wireless cable" bands, which are mostly licensed to Sprint, the IFTS (educational TV bands) mostly licensed to Catholic Archdioceses but now authorized for subleasing) and a band around 3.5GHz. Various bands around 3.2, 3.5 and 3.6GHz is also where other parts of the world are expected to deploy these services.

    If you are a large provider, like Sprint, you had better get field trials underway by now, or your licenses may be in danger of expiring. And you will be negotiating with a handful of equipment manufacturers for a wholesale deal on equipment working on your licensed frequencies.

    If you are a small ISP, you will probably have to look to the unlicensed 5.8GHz, and talk to Alvarion. I have not looked much at who else has equipment for that band. Be aware that the higher frequencies do not travel as far as 2.4GHz, so you may in fact be better off with high-end WiFi kit built from the ground up for outdoor use.

    If you are a user, you need to shop around for a service provider, and let them worry about the right equipment.

    (I work for a small wireless equipment house that makes low-bandwidth wireless systems for very long range, especially targeted to underdeveloped areas of the world. http://www.afar.net/)

  37. Re:AUA by dentar · · Score: 1

    BFE and AUA are not acronyms. Acronyms must be pronounceable as a word, like FUBAR or ASAP.

    --
    -- I am. Therefore, I think!
  38. Nat or Pat will help solve your problem... by woodsrunner · · Score: 1

    All you need to do is connect your first connection to a router and use Network Address Translation to split your one address into many private addresses.

    This will not only allow you to allocate a fairly large address space, but will also allow your addresses to be unroutable, meaning that an outsider will not be able to reach your machine without you explicitly allowing them to.

    This may be an overly simplistic answer to your question, but it should work even if you have to use an old box and run something like ipcop you can then have an additional router with some fairly sophisticated firewalling to split up your account and then ethernet cable to a wireless router.

  39. Yeeeaaah. You do that. by ki4iib · · Score: 1

    They'll be able to make the amateur ops happy when BPL stops blanketing the surrounding countryside with stray RF =)

  40. You will have WiMax.... by otis+wildflower · · Score: 1

    ... When Google partners with Wal-Mart to install APs on their stores.

  41. Catch 22 by HomerJayS · · Score: 2, Informative
    Don't hold your breath for WiMax or broadband over powerline coming to a BFE near you.

    Deploying a broadband infrastructure takes lots of $$$. And where are the best places to recover your capitol expenses? The high population density areas (which by the way already have other forms of broadband already available (cable, DSL)).

    The bottom line is that you have to already have access to broadband in order to get other forms of broadband.

    I live in BFE Ohio and am resigned to the fact that I will need to wait for suburban sprawl to engulf my area before I'll have any hope of broadband.

    1. Re:Catch 22 by HomerJayS · · Score: 1
      You are correct that there is a long term benefit in being able to remotely read meters.

      But, you are forgetting that the standard electric meter does not have the ability to transmit its readings. There is additional cost with replacing all of these meters. Power companies are miserly when it comes to investing in any infrastructure. (I've worked for one).

      There are also huge regulatory hurdles to overcome in any infrastructure upgrades for utilities. Every $ spent must be justified before the respective state's Public Utilities Commission to 'ensure' that the costs are not being 'unfairly' being passed on to consumers. All this makes providing last mile BPL service to BFE even more unattractive (from the corporate perspective).

  42. In Greenville SC ... by adzoox · · Score: 2, Informative

    We have a startup called Main Street Wimax ...

    They have the wireless service spread over a 10 mile radius at $26.95 a month for 4Mb service.

    They have this same service "morphed" into a free downtown Wifi network. (Basically taking the wimax modem and running it into a wireless router then installing repeaters every 300 ft downtown.)

    It's building slowly but surely - it's not going to be for big cities - it will be rural broadband.

    --
    Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
    1. Re:In Greenville SC ... by the_crowbar · · Score: 1

      As a resident of Greenville can you give me any more details on this? Right now I have the Charter price rape package. I can be downtown in less than 10 min (I think I am less than 5 miles). I would definitely be interested in finding out more. Thanks, James

      --
      Have you read the Moderator Guidelines
  43. Re:AUA by WhyCantIBeYou · · Score: 2, Informative
    According to Merriam-Webster dictionary:

    Main Entry: acronym
    Pronunciation: 'a-kr&-"nim
    Function: noun
    Etymology: acr- + -onym
    : a word (as NATO, radar, or snafu) formed from the initial letter or letters of each of the successive parts or major parts of a compound term; also : an abbreviation (as FBI) formed from initial letters : INITIALISM (the emphasis is mine)

  44. Wireless ISP locater by dme2k · · Score: 2, Informative

    A wireless ISP locater as well as other good broadband wireless info is available at http://bbwexchange.com/. I was amazed at how many wireless ISPs are in operation in rural areas already. (most are line-of-sight point-to-point wireless)

  45. Either Bum Fuck Egypt or Butt Fuck Egypt. by Secrity · · Score: 2, Informative

    In the past 30 or so years, many of them in the US military, I have frequently heard the terms "Bum Fuck Egypt" or "Butt Fuck Egypt" (abbreviated as "BFE") used to indicate a remote location. I have also (very seldom) heard the term "Beyond Fucking Egypt" (also abbreviated as "BFE") used to indicate a long distance .

    RFD stands for "Rural Free Delivery", which I believe was replaced by the term "Rural Route".

    BUFF as a name for a B52 means "Big Ugly Fat Fucker".

  46. Licensed and Unlicensed Spectrum are possible by billstewart · · Score: 1

    Wimax is designed to work in several different frequency bands, including the unlicensed bands everybody else uses and also some licensed bands. Some ISPs I know are leaning toward only using licensed service - it takes longer to get approval, but you don't have to worry about interference from everybody's home wifi networks; others are going full-blast with unlicensed-band pre-standard equipment so they can get fast rollouts.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  47. Pre-Standard and Need Local ISP by billstewart · · Score: 2, Informative
    The standards for fixed service are pretty much baked, but there are still compatibility concerns, and not everybody's really running compatible standards-based equipment yet. There's also lots of hype about the various roaming-type WiMax services, but don't hold your breath for another year or two on that stuff.

    Also, of course, you still need to have an ISP within earshot who's running the stuff. Some ISPs are planning to do licensed spectrum only, and some are planning to do unlicensed, and of course the distance they get depends a lot on geography, and BFE PA is pretty hilly; your luck getting service may depend on whether there's a good mountain-top you can see that some ISP can also see.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  48. I worked on an 802.16 project... by Chabil+Ha' · · Score: 2, Interesting

    at the Idaho National Laboratory this last summer. They currently have a fully operational 802.16 network supporting their staff. I tell ya, there is nothing more cool than being miles and miles away from the tower and getting a full 54Mb signal in the middle of the desert!

    --
    We're all hypocrites. We all have hidden parts, it's the contrast between them that make us more a hypocrite than others
  49. Re:AUA by emtboy9 · · Score: 1

    Wrong... since this is slashdot, I happily point out the flaws in other's logic and or statements:

    acronym Audio pronunciation of "acronym" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kr-nm)
    n.

            A word formed from the initial letters of a name, such as WAC for Women's Army Corps, or by combining initial letters or parts of a series of words, such as radar for radio detecting and ranging.

    --
    "Our funds have never taken part in toxic or death spiral convertible financings of any sort" -BayStar's managing partne
  50. Re:butt fuck egypt? by tacokill · · Score: 1

    BFE stands for Bumfuck, Eqypt.

    Which means "out in the middle of nowhere". I had heard that there was a city called "Bumfunk" or something similar but personally, I've never actually seen the city on a map so I am guessing someone was just joking with me.

    It is a VERY common saying throughout the entire US. Don't know about our British friends across the pond, though.

  51. Verizon is advertising WiMAX by SwashbucklingCowboy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    availability in selected areas of the country. I've seen their ad on TV a number of times now. No idea if it actually works though...

  52. Cellphone data services? by billstewart · · Score: 1

    There are some cellphone companies that provide high-speed data service (as opposed to relatively low-speed, which has been out for a while.) I don't know if they're in your part of PA, and I don't know if they meet your definition of "affordable" (they're usually ~$80/month for real data service, as opposed to ~$20-30 "unlimited" service that's only unlimited for use on your cellular handset, not your PC.)

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
    1. Re:Cellphone data services? by scbysnx · · Score: 1

      I don't think the have EVDO in BFE

  53. Re:Verizon commercials by Nutria · · Score: 2, Funny

    Kinda worthless, IMO, if you couldn't do something like play a steady game of WoW while riding a bus.

    But of course, since we all know that the only reason for getting BB is for playing WoW, right?

    Grow up, get a real job, move out of your parents' basement.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  54. Not according to the Map by woodsrunner · · Score: 2, Insightful
    ...if I am reading the map correctly, the lighter orange area is broadband whereas the dark orange is where you'll get service if you are lucky. Read their disclaimer:

    This map shows approximately where rates and coverage apply based on our internal data. Wireless service is subject to network and transmission limitations, including cell site unavailability, particularly near boundaries and remote areas. Customer equipment, weather, topography, and other environmental considerations associated with radio technology also affect service and service may vary significantly within buildings. With "all-digital" devices, you can only make and receive calls when digital service is available. When digital service is not available, your device will not operate or be able to make 911 calls. Check the roam indicator on your phone to determine actual areas where service rates apply.


    If you look at the whole of PA, there are large areas without any service.

    Pennyslvania is a tough market for any wireless tech. Due to the hilly terrain, line of sight is limited. I'd make sure it works before investing.

    I have field agents who use my mobile application in PA and they say most places they hit do not even get crappy cell service. So we set them up with dial up and modems for their PDA's. Cellular modems, from our tests, are slow (1200 - 2400 bps) and dodgy when used over normal cellular networks.

    ... Although if you can see a broadband tower from your place, cellular broadband would be a nice way to go. And to be honest, I'd prefer it over my home connection of DSL and plan to switch when/if it ever becomes available. I am not holding my breathe.
  55. I'm with you by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 1

    In related news: what exactly is "The Power of MSN Premium"? Is it anything?

    --
    My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
  56. Re:butt fuck egypt? by Starker_Kull · · Score: 1

    Thanks for the enlightenment. I thought it stood for "Big Fucking Empty".

  57. A female friend said he had a WiMAX... by suitepotato · · Score: 1

    ...but on further questioning said she faked it.

    Why is it that this wireless stuff gets fawning slavish attention from the /. crowd which is otherwise very given to tinfoil hat paranoia? I mean, did Johnny Mnemonic not come to mind yet with the concept of electronic everything affecting the human nervous system? Did all the scares over power and cell towers and cancer clusters and cell phone brain cancer stories not sink in?

    I'm not saying it is necessarily all bad, but to give adoring praise constantly to every wireless trend that comes down the pike without any questioning of the health and environmental ramifications while not giving the same pass to almost anything else is merely pointing out the intellectual dishonesty of /. overall.

    We're willing to turn a blind eye to what agrees with our predispostions. Apple does DRM'd music we okay it. Anyone uses WMA DRM and they're pawns of the evil Microsoft. We give a free pass to wireless but not nuclear tech. We have no problem with anyone EXCEPT Microsoft giving software away for free and if MS does it, they're being unfairly anti-competitive.

    I'm not entirely satisfied that we should be turning our present electromagnetic soup into a chunky stew in the rush to watch full motion pr0n on our cell phones while we drive to work with the other hand on our (censored) using it to steer, one leg out the windows and the other foot changing the radio station.

    --
    If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
    1. Re:A female friend said he had a WiMAX... by ConsoleDeamon · · Score: 1

      A female friend said he had a WiMAX...?! Wait, "female friend" and "he" ....

  58. Direcway by TheSync · · Score: 1

    Consider satellite (if it is your last option), such as DirecWay. Yes, latency is a problem for gaming, but for web surfing the speeds are getting much better.

  59. Re:Verizon commercials by PyroX_Pro · · Score: 1

    He just SAID he wanted to play Wow on a bus, that's pretty far out of the parents basement :P Good for the MMO players out there, that find time to do something they enjoy rather than just work 9-5 for the man and play sally with their wife.

  60. where? by jshaped · · Score: 1

    "I live in BFE (read 'remote') Pennsylvania..."

    You pronounce BFE as 'remote'?
    I would pronounce it as 'buffy'.

    1. Re:where? by version5 · · Score: 1
      --

      "It's Dot Com!"

  61. WiMax hype by ka9dgx · · Score: 1
    I'm continually amazed at the amount of Hype this technology seems to foster. Why the vendors don't just explain it in plain english is beyond me.

    WiMax is a FIXED, POINT TO POINT multiple access protocol for backhaul, NOT end users. It's intended for linking 300 foot towers with line of sight to each other over a Metropolitan Area.

    It's NOT something you're going to use for your laptop, or cellphone, or even at home. You're not going to buy a Linksys WiMax router any time soon.

    Ugh!

    --Mike--

    1. Re:WiMax hype by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Then why are the major silicon companies building WiMAX chipsets to go in low end routers (SOHO) and notebook computers.

            WiMAX has many uses. Backhaul is one. CPE and notebooks are other uses.

            Check the products that are being offered before you state that it is a backhaul only technology.

      (Disclosure: I work at one of the major silicon companies on WiMAX.)

    2. Re:WiMax hype by LightningBolt! · · Score: 1

      > WiMax is a FIXED, POINT TO POINT multiple access protocol
      > for backhaul, NOT end users.

      You are mistaken. It's intended for both backhaul and end-user access.

      > Why the vendors don't just explain it in plain english is beyond me.

      Intel's main WiMax page explains it right at the top:

      "WiMAX is a standards-based wireless technology that provides high-throughput broadband connections over long distances. WiMAX can be used for a number of applications, including "last mile" broadband connections, hotspots and cellular backhaul, and high-speed enterprise connectivity for business."

      --
      Old people fall. Young people spring. Rich people summer and winter.
  62. I agree; millions don't by ThreeDayMonk · · Score: 1

    For what it's worth, I agree with you. However, since acronym is commonly used to encompass all abbreviations formed in this way, pronounceable words or not, there's no point in being prescriptive about it. Linguistically speaking, there is no "correct" usage: there is only convention, and conventions change.

    --
    If your comment title says 'Re: Foo', I'm not likely to read it.
  63. If I had mod points... by juanescalante · · Score: 1

    I would have modded you insightful rather than just funny.

  64. NAT is beautiful solution to address space & by woodsrunner · · Score: 4, Informative

    Security is just a side benefit to the solution requested. The user asked for a way to split up an adress in order to avoid paying $60 per computer at his site. I figure they hadn't heard of NAT so I gave him my $0.02.

    NAT alone does improve security. It is far better than a direct connection. NAT alone will stop a lot of port scan worms and door knob testers(the bulk of the crud that attacks simple users like myself). It's like having a cheap U-Lock on your bike, sure you can pick it with a BIC, but most people don't know that and it keeps mooks from riding off on it. THis is why most broadband routers & modems these days have NAT, it's a good first step.

    Double NAT, however, is a different story. Double NAT is more difficult to breach. I am not going to say it is foolproof but it takes some serious effort to get across and for the networks that I have set up with this solution the end users have seen a dramatic drop in successful attacks. The only thing that I have seen succeed are trojans.

    Still, if you want to be secure, I did suggested http://www.ipcop.org/, a linux distro that uses ipchains/tables and is a fairly sophisticated firewall and I have found to be a reliable and cost effective alternative to PIX or Checkpoint. Sites I have installed this solution in conjunction with good AV have had no breaches and they still run 98.

    Security is not just one thing. Like the bike example above, security is many things: not just locking the front wheel, but locking the frame and both wheels; locking it in a well lit and visible place; bringing it indoors when possible... security is a matter of practicing many layers of secure procedures across the board -- it's using a secure OS, strong passwords, using virus/spyware protection, using firewalls, intrusion detection, logging, etc.

    For the average enduser, most of this doesn't make any sense and you can't expect them to get it right even some of the time. But you put an unpatched Win98 box behind double NAT, even single NAT, and you will see a dramatic reduction in exploitation.

    That qualifies as an improvement in security.

  65. Have Fixed Wireless in BF Michigan by CTD · · Score: 1

    Just ran a snap test at www.bandwithplace.com in another window and got these results:

    Communications 536.6 kilobits per second
    Storage 65.5 kilobytes per second
    1MB file download 15.6 seconds
    Subjective rating Not bad

    I get service on par with DSL and have zero problems with latency. I have a few problems with Halo2 on Xbox live, but that is more due to Old Gamers Syndrome than it is connectivity.

    I believe that I am running 2.4Ghz, because the owner of the ISP suggested that I run down to a 900Mhz phone, and not up to a 5.8Ghz saying that he could promise he would not scale down to 900..

    Provider: West Michigan Wireless ISP
    http://www.wmwisp.net/modules/news/

    Good folks.

    --
    Grimwell - old, cranky, mean, obsessive
  66. State of the WiMax by Fuzzball963 · · Score: 1

    I don't think that Rev A is rolled out anywhere. I remember hearing VZW was testing it for possible deployement like 2007?? I think the Rev A will be around 3.4Mbps down/1.8Mbps up maximum, which is still better than the standard EV-DO. Just out of curiosity, what is the latency like on EV-DO and EV-DO Rev A? Does anyone know.

    --
    "The boy is dangerous, they all sense it, why can't you?"
  67. Another meaning for AUA by Medievalist · · Score: 1

    In the defense industry we used it for "Another Unpronounceable Abbreviation".

    AFA was "Another Fucking Acronym", though.

  68. I AM in your shoes... by hot+soldering+iron · · Score: 1

    I currently reside in BFE, Missouri (What a coincidence). The best transfer rate I can get is 22K modem (That's K!! Not M!!!) All the major carriers say that I won't live long enough to see THEM bring broadband out here.

    I'm 39.

    I did talk to someone in the closest town (24 miles away) about wireless broadband. He checked the topo maps and said I only need to get a 250 ft tower. A $60/mo. service plan for a year and I'm good to go.
    Of course, I should get the 'net for free for a couple of years, given what a tower that size runs (tens of thousands of dollars).

    Anyone have ideas on how I can affordably get faster speeds that a carrier pidgeon?

    --
    When you want something built, come see me. If you want correct grammar and spelling, get a F*ing liberal arts student.
    1. Re:I AM in your shoes... by Iguanaphobic · · Score: 1

      Put in the tower, get connected and resell to everyone you can hit with your tower.

      --
      Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power.
    2. Re:I AM in your shoes... by netruner · · Score: 2, Informative

      I second that. I live in rural Jefferson County, Missouri and I have a wireless service that works, well, most of the time, kinda. I have been keeping statistics on them for about 2 years now (100 pings on the tower at 4 hour intervals, output piped to text files) and I'm starting to spot trends of when the service dropps off. Initially, I thought it was that in the summer, the leaves were on the trees and they were blocking my signal (I'm about .25 miles from the tower with trees in the way), but I'm starting to think that there is more of a weather component to it (air viscocity, heat on the antenna and boards). I noticed that about 1-2 days after it rains, the connection gets better while the longer we go without rain and the hotter it gets, the worse the connection gets.

      Does anyone know of a tool that can be acquired relatively cheaply that can be used to find sources of interference in the 2.4GHz range? Also, is there any type of toy that uses 2.4GHz that one could reasonably expect to work over that distance that I could use to check for blockage?

      --



      DISCLAIMER: This post was not checked for speling and grammar- if you complain- you're a whiner
    3. Re:I AM in your shoes... by hot+soldering+iron · · Score: 1

      The only tools I know of that would work for that are: 1) HP Measuring reciever ($50K) 2)Spectrum analyzer with directional antenna (~$20K for a real nice one) 3)reciever tuned to 2.4 GHz and direction finding antenna (cheapest bet).

      Check with the local hams. Someone probably has gear that will do the trick, and will have the know-how and experience to come out and do it for you.

      That's the cheapest way right there.

      --
      When you want something built, come see me. If you want correct grammar and spelling, get a F*ing liberal arts student.
    4. Re:I AM in your shoes... by unitron · · Score: 1
      "...about 1-2 days after it rains, the connection gets better while the longer we go without rain and the hotter it gets, the worse the connection gets."

      So once the rain water gets well soaked into the soil things are good and when lack of rain and evaporation of moisture due to heat dry out the soil things get bad? Sounds like they used a rusty coat hanger as the sole tower ground.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  69. Geography is your biggest opponent. by shadowd · · Score: 1

    I don't know where you are located in comparison to your neighbours, but I've usually found that I'm not the only one wishing I had a better Internet connection. The current WiFi standard(s) or even 802.11 Pre-N solutions may be enough for you to build your own wireless mesh and share the cost of a T1 line with your neighbours. Alternatively, you could look at something like Free Space Optics for longer hauls. It's more expensive, but that type of thing is something that the Municipal P-T-B might consider funding.

  70. Re:AUA by _pi-away · · Score: 1

    The correct usage is quickly losing ground, but a real english teacher (or copyeditor) will still find you in error for using the term acronym when you mean initialism, or vice versa.

    While Merriam-Webster is good, I suggest you consult the MLA or the Chicago Manual of Style when you have real english usage questions. They (and the OED) are considered the actual standards.

    The acronym/initialism situation is discussed on wiki here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acronym_and_initialis m

    --

    "The crows seemed to be calling his name, thought Caw."
  71. $$$ poof by drwho · · Score: 1

    Expensive, equipment-wise. Not available in many places. With the unlicensed bands, there's not a lot of space left at 900 or 2.4 ghz.

    It might be better to get some people together and do some wifi link out to a location where you can get service. But that's a lot of work. But $500 can get you a power link.

  72. What ever happened.... by ZMorek · · Score: 1

    to broadband over powerlines? Wasn't that supposed to be the next big thing for... the past few years...

    --
    -ZMorek
  73. Wimax? by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

    I want FTTP.

  74. 802.16a Mesh Mode by cciRRus · · Score: 1

    I'm particularly interested in the mesh mode of 802.16a, where each 802.16a node is able to operate as both the subscriber and base station. This forms a wireless mesh network, and this is largely different from the usual point-to-multipoint mode. A wireless mesh enables wireless coverage to areas not reached by the base station but can be reached by the other client nodes.

    There are a lot of publications on 802.16a at the IEEE 802.16 Task Group A. I find the tutorial presentation slides particularly helpful in explaining the 802.16a mesh mode, although it gets really technical towards the end.

    Here's a good technical introduction to WiMAX.

    I am doing performance studies on the WiMAX network. Please contact me if you are interested in sharing your views, tips and experiences of deploying a WiMAX network.

    --
    w00t
  75. Re:Verizon commercials by Nutria · · Score: 1

    it was an example, dipshit, seeing as how you're completely unaware that most wifi BB have shitty unreliable connections.

    Replace "play wow" with any of your favorites:


    He said it's worthless if you can't do Z on the bus.

    That's stupid.

    There are millions of people who will get huge use out of WiMax without ever using it in a bus, car, van, SUV, etc.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
  76. Got WaveTop? :) by Halvy · · Score: 1, Informative

    I think you have many options while waiting for the fat cats to get to you.

    - *IF* your satellite companys has the feature, use only their downlink-- but uplink with a land phone (little to no latency).

    - Get a T1.. there not as expensive as the past and I believe the phone company will put them anywhere there are paved roads.

    - You probably have enough pots wiring to have at least 4 phone lines at once. Find out if any isp in the area (or any with reasonable 800's which are not in the area) handle: 'Load Balancing', which is a feature that combines your several regular phone lines into one, which can be as fast or faster than isdn.

    - There are probably alot of other people frustrated 'out there' as well. Get together with them and start your own little wireless isp..maybe even charge new people a few bux.

    - And last but not least, should you get realllly desperate (or board).. Remember this? :) http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=58 383

    --
    I will gladly loose all of life's battles.. in order to win the war..
  77. An important point often overlooked by MadAhab · · Score: 1
    Thanks for making that point.

    WiMax looks like a good technology - but don't expect to usefully deploy it yrself unless you can afford the mucho bux0r to license the bands. And if you can't, expect vicious competition and/or poor results.

    This will mostly be useful to folks in broadband-poor areas, period.

    Beware impostors! I have at least one, by handle

    --
    Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
  78. i feel your pain by compro01 · · Score: 1

    i live in a small (100) village, merely 15 miles out of a fair size town (which has no fewer than 2 cable companies, both of which provide net access.) the phone company has been screwing around for many years (i was supposed to get high speed access back in 2002, and last time i checked the calender, it's now 2005, and i'm still on dial up) and even better, they've basically got a monopoly on the net access out here. there isn't even a local number for AOHell. and the techs are blameless. if you call, the problem is with your equipment (regardless of the fact that no one else in town can dial in). the price is a bit ludicris ($45/month for 180 hours (comes to about 3 hours a day between me and my sister, which is not nearly enough when downloads take fracking forever.)

    --
    upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time