Slashdot Mirror
The 700mhz Spectrum Auction In Perspective
YIAAL writes "Writing in Popular Mechanics, Robert X. Cringely looks at the upcoming auction of the 700mbz spectrum, which is currently used for soon-to-be-defunct analog TV. 'Why are all these companies so excited? Because the 60 MHz of spectrum that's about to be auctioned is the last prime real estate for mobile communications that will be available in the U.S. for decades to come ... Some pundits (that would be me) think Google will bid to win its spectrum block, then will trade that block to Sprint/Nextel for some of that company's 2.5-GHz WiMAX licenses that are far better suited for data.' Plus, the prospect of offering unlicensed data service in the 'white space' between existing broadcast channels."
What are we talking about here? Millihertz? Millibitz (or whatever the 'z' in mbz means)?
I've been deeply skeptical all along and now the _how_ google wins it is in place with this quote "trade that block to Sprint/Nextel"
The _why_ this spectrum will be neither cheap nor open is in the quote "trade that block to Sprint/Nextel"
Sigh...
Got Trader Joe's? friendwich.com RSS feeds work now!
I'm anxious to see what develops from this. The 700 Mhz band should have a fairly large range (greater than normal wi-fi), but less than a radio station for example, given the same power. I'm interested in what each of the bidders wants to use the band for, most likely for providing wireless internet. At first connection speed might be a problem though, but still acceptable for casual browsing and e-mail. maybe not fast enough for real-time youtube.
And what would happen if one of the bid winners licensed existing TV stations to broadcast over some specific frequency just as they already are? Sure, it's not innovative or revolutionary, but the broadcast TV model has already proven profitable, and there are a LOT of people in the US with out HD TV's/Converters. Seems like there could be a rather solid market out there to continue the status quo, at least for a while until the HD penetration numbers rise.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
"He Who Dares Wins"
Google: Hey Sprint/Nextel, trade you my 700 Mhz for your 2.5Ghz! ... damn!
(awkward pause)
Sprint/Nextel: nah.
(awkward pause)
Google:
stuff |
Personally, I'm a little angry that their killing off regular broadcast TV to begin with. Granted, digital is really great if you have a tuner for it...but a LOT of people DON'T!.
If they're selling this spectrum off for 6 billion of 20 billion or whatever it is, I propose that they use the money to purchase enough digital tuners to give out for free to anybody who asks for the following 2 years after they make the switch.
NewslilySocial News. No lolcats allowed.
They already have the coupon system ($40 off a tuner, and surely someone will make a simple one for less than that).
You're a few years too late in your complaint.
You can get 2 $40 coupons at this site
Karma: NaN
Thanks for the answer! That makes a lot of sense, even if it does mean no Google TV ;)
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
Yeh it's all very well having cheap tuners, but they are useless if the are you live in doesn't have dull coverage until after the switchover (certain areas of the UK).
America, Home of the Brave.
FPN: 0010119691
PW: google
The article is just plain wrong when it states that the 2.5GHz band is superior for data, it is not. Throughput is primarily dependent on bandwidth, so 20MHz at in the 700MHz spectrum will effectively carry the same amount of data as 20MHz in the 2500MHz spectrum. The big difference is that Google can provide coverage in rural/suburban areas that have relatively low demand for throughput with far fewer sites. In urban areas Google can pack the sites just as closely together and will still be better off then they would with the 2.5GHz spectrum because they won't have to install in-building repeaters to ensure good coverage inside many of the buildings that would otherwise require such a system.
--- There are two kinds of people, those who accept dogmas and know it, and those who accept dogmas and don't know it
lame joke I know.
'Once scientists, even the dim-witted social scientists, get muzzled, the Western Civilization is finished.' - oldhack
Ed Snider owns the Spectrum. But he's going to tear it down.
My user number is prime. Is yours?
for a dollar!
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
You will need to get a new TiVO if you want to use it to change the channel or record a channel not currently being watched.
The converter box will be the new 'channel changer'
If TiVO is really customer service oriented, they will let you pass the subscription to a new TiVO box.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I doubt very much that they will sell it to Sprint/Nextel. They have just laid off 4,000 employees and are Closing 125 of thier stores nationwide. Sprint just isnt making any money at the moment, and thier churn far exceeds that of the other top 5 Wireless telcos.
Sprint will be focusing on revitalising its marketing and trying to win customers back, rather than bank money in a high risk venture that wont even pay off for them for years to come.
Just my 2 cents.
I know Google had some patents in the last year that pointed towards possible entrance into the cell phone Market. But trading it for some 2.5 would be quite the coup for them.
"Teach a man to build a fire, and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life."
If broadcast TV viewer erosion continues at the current rate, and it will likely accelerate, there will be a lot more frequency spectrum available to be sold off by 2015.
Here are some reasons why:
Digital switch. The change to digital broadcasts will not postpone the inevitable, but will actually hasten the demise of broadcast TV. Of the approximately 20 million households who still receive analog broadcast TV, only about 5 million of them will bother with the ATSC converter set-top boxes, coupons or no. The other 15 million will switch to basic cable or satellite.
Interference. The radio frequency interference caused by the proposed "broadband over white spaces" and "broadband over power lines" will cause so many parasitic harmonics that digital TV reception will degrade to the point where it is useless. As viewers get more and more frustrated with trying to receive the broadcast ATSC signal in the ever-noisier environment, they'll look to other alternatives for their entertainment.
Reality TV. Only idiots watch it. Idiots have no purchasing power because they're too stupid to have middle-class jobs, ergo the so-called "ratings" are meaningless to the advertisers. As the dollar is devalued even more, the middle-class will become the lower-class and will have even less purchasing power than the lower-class workers before them.
Advertisers. There are at least 8 times more channels on basic cable and satellite than on broadcast. The advertisers have already moved the bulk of their operations and money to these methods of delivery and are giving up on broadcast TV because of the ever-shrinking number of broadcast TV viewers who have purchasing power.
No matter what Zoran, the NTIA and the FCC are speculating about and hoping for, broadcast TV will be dead by 2020 and only a memory by the time the 100th anniversary of the Farnsworth invention arrives.
RIP Broadcast TV.
Google: I will trade you some of my 700 MHz for your 2.5 GHz Sprint: NO WAI! 2.5 GHz is ultra rare! Google: K! I throw in my lvl 75 Pikachu Sprint: DONE! Score. LOL You suck at this? Google: WAT U MEAN? Sprint: I would have traded for your LV 50 Bulbasaurus and Pikachu! Sprint: Who carez about MEGAHURTZ! LOL! U NEWB! Google: :(
Also keep in mind that Sprint has up to 90 MHz of bandwidth at 2.5 GHz. Arguments about 2.5GHz being better-suited to data often implicitly rely on that point.
I bet this is wrong, but I just thought about the YouTube purchase last year.
YouTube + Old TV's + UHF Channels = user generated broadcasts to the masses with AdSense video units playing in between.
I would actually like to hear some informed ideas about what this will actually likely be used for. I'm sure it's really cool...I'm just not sure exactly how.
expandfairuse.org
Has anyone considered that this spectrum will likely be garbage for data transmission (if not all sorts of transmission) for those within about 100 miles of the Canadian border until about mid-2011 when Canada switches from Analog to Digital service? Or are they going to work around Canadian stations (which are permitted to broadcast "hotter" than those in the US)?
And then there's about 100 miles of the southern states that will be enjoying interference from Mexico.
Just wondering, because that will be an interesting fight...
Oops, I typed that at the end of a long day. UK is about the only non-typo in there. ;-)
America, Home of the Brave.
How dare they assume that they can abuse me and FREELY use my private property to transmit their signals with impunity.
The more I read about the health problems created by RF signals, the deeper my concern becomes. Nowhere have I seen ANYTHING that addresses these private companies power output plans. For all I know, it can be unrestricted. I am thinking that a million watts of RF power coursing through the bodies of your children 24 hours a day is not a good thing. Especially if it originates from private companies who are only interested in pursuing profit - to heii with the health of people.