Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Pledges To Bring Better Broadband To Two Million Rural Americans in the Next Five Years (recode.net)
Microsoft on Tuesday announced a new campaign to try to "eliminate" the gap in high-speed internet access in the country's hardest-to-reach areas -- an effort called the Rural Airband Initiative, which will set an ambitious target of bringing better broadband to two million Americans within the next five years. From a report: The Redmond, Wash.-based software giant plans to start its efforts in 12 states, offering seed money -- Microsoft wouldn't specify the amount -- to local telecom providers that are trying to improve internet access through means like "white spaces," which are the invisible, wireless radio airwaves that aren't already owned by broadcasters. From Microsoft point of view, this approach -- aimed at delivering speedy wireless internet -- is the best way to improve connectivity in parts of the country that broadband providers long have ignored, given the prohibitive costs of building and sustaining networks there. By Microsoft's count, more than 23 million Americans in rural areas currently lack high-speed internet access, despite billions of dollars in federal investment. But the company emphasized that it is not looking to become a telecom provider -- it's only providing capital to local firms -- and does not seek to profit from the endeavor. Through revenue-sharing agreements, Microsoft instead plans to invest any money it raises in additional projects in other states where internet access is lacking.
Google should approach MS, Apple, Facebook, and Netflix and suggest that they invest into Google Fiber. At that point, rename it to American FIber and then push this all around America. Seriously, if all of these companies simply invested into this and focused on any of the places in which telcos were screwing over others (ok, all of America), then it would solve a LOT.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
I wish someone would bring better internet to mid-sized cities in the US.
We're still stuck with low quality monopoly cable internet paying 3 or 4 times what you guys in big cities with Google Fiber get after competition drives prices down.
Yeah... I'm sure very-rural America would love to have cable speed connections but a big bang for the buck could be had by removing cable monopolies on broadband internet in the mid sized cities.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
It does make you wonder what they are trying to get out of this
They are increasingly in the business of selling subscribed-to services that individuals and small businesses (say, farming operations in rural America) can't use without reliable high-enough-speed connectivity. Tens of millions of people lacking decent connectivity represents a lot of potential that MS can't eventually market to. To say nothing of the near impossibility of someone living on the side of a mountain somewhere getting their copy of Windows 10 patched/updated over the wire when they've got - at best - DSL or awful satellite service.
Just spent the last weekend driving around parts of Virginia, in the outskirts of the Charlottesville area. We're talking about people who own multi-million-dollar horse farms and wineries who have to drive 30 minutes into town to use the WiFi at a Starbucks. But they can't get cable or fiber out to their properties because nobody will do it, almost regardless of the price offered. Some sort of terrestrial wireless solution on poles, hilltop-to-hilltop, is the only way to go. LEO sats MAY provide some relief, but not likely enough to bank on when you're trying to run a point-of-sale system at the tasting room of your thousand acre winery with two hundred guests trying to give you money.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
I'm pretty sure Google wanted to float balloons over Africa and create a mesh network, so that neighboring tribes in rural Africa could "like" each others Facebook postings...
Seriously, they do have a Project Link to tie cities together with fiber optic cables and yet another plan to use vacant TV spectrum for wireless internet in a very select region of Africa...
Oh look, Microsoft trialed this technology in Africa a couple years ago.
Ken
This is the phone company's job, not Microsoft's. WTF am I paying a Universal Service Fund then?
Fully licensed blockchain psychiatrist
Through both direct government subsidy and extra fees, the phone companies have been collecting money for years that was supposed to be going to exactly this purpose.
The fact is, there's no substitute for good, wired broadband connections. All of these attempts to provide service to unserved areas with wireless technologies are second-rate solutions that still leave rural customers at a disadvantage.
Pretty much anywhere in the U.S., I can set up a satellite broadband connection and have "high speed Internet" -- only it's subject to a lot of terms and conditions. High latency is a big show-stopper with it for many things, like online gaming or VoIP telephony. And then you have the high cost and bandwidth caps that come with it.
In many rural areas I've been in, you have at least one area ISP offering microwave type broadband, where you put one of their receiver antennas on your roof and get service that way. Again, it's better than only DSL as an option, but it's not great. It's costly and slower than speeds people are used to getting with cable modems.
In other places, you can hobble along with an LTE cellular hotspot and whatever limitations come with the cellular subscription you've got with it.
The point is -- none of this stuff is really very good. They're all wireless solutions that inherently have more issues than a piece of cable stuck in the ground or running along a pole to your property.