Slashdot Mirror
Verizon Reveals Plans For "C Block" Airwaves
eldavojohn writes "Now that Verizon has beaten Google in the 'block C' spectrum auction, what are they going to do with it? Well, as of today they've revealed their plans for world domination: they plan to speed up wireless internet connections. It may come as no surprise that they'll also be making this available for other manufacturer's devices. AT&T plans to do the same with their auction winnings, 'AT&T was second to Verizon, winning $6 billion in spectrum licenses, which it also plans to use for high-speed Internet service. But its executives said they didn't bid for the portion subject to the open-access rules. The parts it did land cost AT&T nearly three times as much per unit of spectrum than the portion Verizon bought.'"
...for wireless communication. News at 11!
It looks like nobody really cares what Verizon does, considering there are no posts here.
to switch carriers. It's facinating though that AT&T paid significantly more than Verizon did for its block. The price of going proprietary?
We're all hypocrites. We all have hidden parts, it's the contrast between them that make us more a hypocrite than others
Why create the semblance of a fight where one did not exist? All google really wanted was open air-waves.
Verizon didn't beat google, Verizon played right into google's hand.
Wireless Internet on cell phones is completely useless right now. Sure, it would be a great convience to use the full Internet on your phone, but there is a huge problem here: phone companies are quick and eager to start these new services, but most customers are still on those dumb "1 cent per kb" deals! They are upgrading the technology, but not the business model.
If Verizon, or any cell phone company for that matter want to ever succeed in making these services popular, they have to change their lame fees. 1 cent per kilobyte, or fees like that, were good back in the days of GPRS when all you had was a text based Internet on phones, but this simply won't do now that you can easily transfer over a dollar in kilobytes in 1 website!
I don't even bother using the Internet or text messages on my older phone, waaaay to expensive!
So if these companies want to ever hope to attract consumers to use the Internet services that would come out of this, they have to change their lame business model, or they will lose money.
Hi there US citizen,
Here, in the EU, we are paying about 30 USD for 5 GB per month (3G mobile internet).
Oh, and if we sign a 2-year contract, we get a free USB wireless modem.
Sincererly,
EU citizen
Huh?
Truth arises more readily from error than from confusion. -Francis Bacon
One of the most obnoxious things to me about my cellphone service (Verizon) is how crappy voice calls sound compared to a regular telephone. It's nice to be able to use the internet on one's phone, but it would be nice if the feature of the phone that I'm using 90% of the time were to sound at least as clear as a landline. And with the signal transmitted digitally, I can't imagine that it would use up that much of the new available bandwidth...
Verizon (and all the other Telcos and ISPs) want us in C-Block all right. Right next to that big guy named "Bubba" with the twinkle in his eye.
Seriously, I don't believe a word of what's coming out of Verizon's collective mouth. I really hope I'm wrong, but "open access" and "Telco" really don't belong in the same sentence.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
What I thought was interesting is that in some big markets, Verizon purchased some A block or B block, and in some cases, both. That's in addition to their C block. They're clearly looking to make sure that they're going to have a lot of available bandwidth.
NYC, Chicago, and LA, they ended up with A, B, and C block purchases. In some other large markets (Washington DC, Dallas, SanFran) they picked up either an A or a B in addition to their nationwide C block.
So they're certainly thinking about capacity and customer density for their future networks.
I kind of wonder, though, to what extent they've squeezed the amount of bandwidth that AT&T is going to have in those major cities. I don't have the details on their previous acquisitions to know for sure, but Verizon certainly took some potential capacity away from them.
I've been c-blocked by many a young lady in an effort to gain open-access.
The neutrality of this sig is disputed.
In LA at least, Verizon has 25 MHz of Cellular 850 MHz, 10 MHz of PCS 1900 MHz, no AWS 1700 MHz spectrum, and now 46 MHz of 700 MHz spectrum, for a total of 81 MHz.
But AT&T has the other 25 MHz Cellular 850 MHz license, 20 MHz of PCS 1900 MHz, 30 MHz of AWS 1700 MHz, and 12 MHz of 700 MHz. So despite Verizon winning more spectrum in the latest auction, AT&T still holds 6 MHz more spectrum in the LA area.
The problem is when these carriers contract for their own custom handsets they lock these models to their own networks. That makes it hard to switch carriers without buying a new phone.
The networks are open already. It's the products that use them which are not. So, what really did Google do? I don't know. Google has always had the freedom to build a handset that runs on either of these networks. So where is it?
Son, someday all this will belong to your ex-wife.
If you sourced that from a database somewhere, I'd love to access it.
I don't know the answer to this, but do you think they [Vz & T] are actually going to try to use all those frequencies on a next generation device, or will they stick to 700MHz or possibly 700MHz + 850MHz?
AT&T and Verizon both have one 25 MHz 850 MHz Cellular license: http://people.ku.edu/~cinema/wireless/west.html Verizon has a single 10 MHz PCS 1900 block: http://people.ku.edu/~cinema/wireless/vzw_pcs_block.html AT&T has the PCS B3 and D blocks. The D block came from old AT&T Wireless, while the B3 block came from Cingular/Pac Bell Wireless. On the AWS side, AT&T won a 10 MHz block covering the west region, plus a 20 MHz block for the LA area, making 30 MHz, while Verizon got nothing: http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/aws/index.php?p=m Then in the 700 MHz auction, AT&T got an additional 12 MHz, and Verizon got 46 MHz: http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=187&p=231 http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/article.php?a=187&p=230
Verizon and AT&T networks have always been open. They even brag about it. You can easily buy a handset from a variety of manufacturers and both Verizon and AT&T will hook you right up.
Sure, but that was their choice, not a legal requirement, and they could choose to lock it down just as easily if they felt that was in their best interests. The would, too. Google obviously wants to expand into the mobile market, but doesn't want to be dependent upon the likes of AT&T (really, SBC) and Verizon for wireless connectivity. Now they're not, at least within the C block.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.