[nycwireless] MIT Tech REview - The WiMax Difference
http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/05/04/wo/wo_042505stu.asp? trk=top The WiMax Difference By Stu Hutson April 25, 2005 WiMAX, or the 802.16 standard, is meant to do for to the Internet what cell phones did for making telephone calls. Soon, Internet access will span for miles with the help of a series of towers delivering connectivity. Unfortunately, the idea has been sloshing around in the murky depths of standards development for years. This has been dragging on so long, in fact, that companies such as Clearwire and California's NextWeb have already built substantial profit margins by offering complicated pre-WiMAX technology services which are scaled down versions of WiMAX that constrict data rates and end-user mobility. But, last week, WiMAX finally hit the big time. Intel announced that it's beginning worldwide shipments of its PRO/Wireless 5116 hardware, which means commercial WiMAX trials are about to start popping up by the end of the year. This isn't the first release of WiMAX hardware, but it does signal the most significant advancement as of yet. The chipmaker will be working with Clearwire to act as a service provider, but numerous other media companies are on board to be WiMAX service carriers. Using the pre-WiMAX technologies already in place, wholly developed ecosystems (as Intel likes to call them) of devices, users, towers and multiple service carriers should be emerging by the end of 2006. But one has to wonder how this set up will take place. In large cities, where it's easy enough to prop a tower on a building, WiMAX will sometimes be in direct competition with city-run, distributed WiFi systems. Although, as Intel points out, WiMAX signals are likely to fade out like a cellular service inside of buildings, so the technology is actually best when paired with interior WiFi hot spots. And many smaller communities, especially in the Northeast, are already peeved at the number of ugly cell phone towers. Although there are rumors that some companies are pushing to revamp some cell towers into WiMAX, since they can also carry cellular signals. As a side note, look for a big portion of WiMAX's early income to come from carrying cellular backhaul -- at least until enough people pick up their own personal WiMAX cards to make the venture profitable for broadband Internet service providers. Along the same lines, WiMAX may actually begin to replace cell phone service. Or at least that's what NextWeb has in mind. They announced last week that they're going to start a WiMAX phone service in a couple of months. So after the big deployment, what's next? Well, there is the eventual deployment of the 802.20 standards, which will be a souped-up cellular service that can provide one megabits per second (Mbps) of data transmission. At issue: this will likely draw too much away from the 3G infrastructure for smart phones, in which phone companies have made tremendous investment. Further down the line, Sanswire may have the winning idea. Last week, they unveiled the first stratellite, a blimpish looking craft that positions itself at a fixed location in the stratosphere to provide wireless service to an area the size of Texas -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
[nycwireless] DSL Prime: Verizon Killing WiFi Wants people to buy $80 EV-DO
From the always astute Dave Burstein. Dave's key observation: This action is a very strong implicit argument for a municipal WiFi build, like Philadelphias, providing basic access to all at a small price or free. My concurrence: To encourage muni wifi (for free public internet access), I like to use an analogy to public libraries -- they allow those who cannot afford to buy books to read them. This does NOT harm bookstores thru lost sales -- in fact, it helps them by increasing the number of lifelong readers. More importantly, free public libraries also greatly benefit society overall, as they provide to those who may lack resources today, the opportunity to access tools they'll need for their future success. --- Joe Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 20:53:31 -0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Dave Burstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: DSL Prime Cable's 50 Meg challenge DSL Prime Verizon Killing WiFi Wants people to buy $80 EV-DO snip Verizon Killing WiFi Wants people to buy $80 EV-DO WiFi had infinite hype three years ago, but Verizon is now shutting down what had been their showcase build in New York City. Bobbi Henson explains We're shutting down the service because it didn't live up to our expectations in usage, ... It doesn't make any sense to keep a service up and running when there's no demand. WiFi demand is much higher where the deployment is wide and the price very low, like Japan. The story was buried in the last paragraph of a wireless press release, but Broadband Wireless and then DSL Reports found it. This is a dramatic reversal of Verizon's once proud plans to run WiFi across New York City and then throughout their territory. Verizon was a pioneer of that service, but pulled back because amazingly few people actually used it, despite a free password for all Verizon DSL customers. This action is a very strong implicit argument for a municipal WiFi build, like Philadelphias, providing basic access to all at a small price or free. We need a service that brings the internet to families who can't afford $34+ a month, and low costs for wireless make that a possible tool. A city can afford to wait ten years for a payback on a wireless investment, not the two or three a telco typically expects. Lower prices create a virtuous circle; the increased volume reduces the cost per home, especially on wireless. I believe Ivan's made a strategic mistake here; the best way to meet the push for municipal competition is to offer great service yourself. If Verizon Wireless were ubiquitous and affordable, the city wouldn't be considering building their own network. But it appears Verizon is abandoning the low cost wireless data market. It's the right thing for New York and other cities to connect families who cannot afford more than $10 or $15 for their daughter's internet. There's no technology reason they can't be served with EV-DO 3G, of course, but that would require dropping the price by 80%. Copyright 2005 Dave Burstein. Volume 6, #17 Issue date 4/27/05 Reply Un to be dropped, subscribe to be added. -- === Joe Plotkin DSL/Marketing Bway.net - NYC's Best Internet === Bway.net 459 Broadway, 2nd floor New York, NY 10013 vox: 212.982.9800 Boston: 617.848.0416 fax: 212.982.5499 efax: 772.365.5877 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] DSL info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://www.bway.net === Fight the Monopoly! http://www.TeleTruth.org === -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
[nycwireless] DSL Prime: Verizon Killing WiFi Wants people
I applaud the Library analogy. In fact, I'd like to see a state legislature pass a resolution or law __affirming__ the right of local municipalities to set up low-cost wireless for their citizens. Can anyone think of a state ripe for enacting such a law or resolution? Oregon? New York? Rob -- Message: 8 Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 13:54:39 -0400 From: Joe Plotkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [nycwireless] DSL Prime: Verizon Killing WiFi Wants people to buy $80 EV-DO To: nycwireless@lists.nycwireless.net Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 ; format=flowed ___ From the always astute Dave Burstein. Dave's key observation: This action is a very strong implicit argument for a municipal WiFi build, like Philadelphias, providing basic access to all at a small price or free. My concurrence: To encourage muni wifi (for free public internet access), I like to use an analogy to public libraries -- they allow those who cannot afford to buy books to read them. This does NOT harm bookstores thru lost sales -- in fact, it helps them by increasing the number of lifelong readers. More importantly, free public libraries also greatly benefit society overall, as they provide to those who may lack resources today, the opportunity to access tools they'll need for their future success. --- Joe -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
Re: [nycwireless] DSL Prime: Verizon Killing WiFi Wants people
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Rob Kelley wrote: In fact, I'd like to see a state legislature pass a resolution or law __affirming__ the right of local municipalities to set up low-cost wireless for their citizens. I will probably be flamed here to hell and back, however, in my opinion, muni broadband is completely retarded. 1) This will complete destruction of independent ISPs - one of major reasons why we get customers is because we are not the incumbent cable or phone company. 2) At towns with for-fee municipal broadband and independent ISPs - essentially, my taxes are being used to compete with me. Doesn't anyone think that this is wrong? 3) Your analogy with library is specious. There is a difference between book you own and book you borrowed - you can't enjoy book you have borrowed forever. 4) More correct analogy would be cities running soup kitchens and serving food to citizens, ones who can and can't afford food alike. That would doubtless be an honorable thing, however, not something that is considered reasonable in this country. 5) If cities want to help deployment of wireless broadband, they should not fight the building of wireless towers. 6) If the concern is about poor people not being able to afford internet, provide monetary contribution to them, so they can buy access from anyone else. Or not buy, if the intarweb isn't their thing. But, preserve the choice of providers. -alex -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
RE: [--] - Re: [nycwireless] DSL Prime: Verizon Killing WiFi Wants people - Email found in subject
Hi Alex, Please...let me be the first to rip you a new one. 1) Read the Philadelphia business plan. If you are an ISP, municipalities like Philly are building a vibrant marketplace for you to sell your service. The city is the wholesaler...not the retailer. 2) Again, read the plan. No tax dollars are used. Even the bonds are taxed, not tax exempt. 5) Cities like Philly aren't fighting the building of new towers. They aren't funding it making it much more costly for the wholesale venders. But they certainly aren't opposing it. The other points aren't even worth addressing. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 2:03 PM To: Rob Kelley Cc: nycwireless@lists.nycwireless.net Subject: [--] - Re: [nycwireless] DSL Prime: Verizon Killing WiFi Wants people - Email found in subject On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Rob Kelley wrote: In fact, I'd like to see a state legislature pass a resolution or law __affirming__ the right of local municipalities to set up low-cost wireless for their citizens. I will probably be flamed here to hell and back, however, in my opinion, muni broadband is completely retarded. 1) This will complete destruction of independent ISPs - one of major reasons why we get customers is because we are not the incumbent cable or phone company. 2) At towns with for-fee municipal broadband and independent ISPs - essentially, my taxes are being used to compete with me. Doesn't anyone think that this is wrong? 3) Your analogy with library is specious. There is a difference between book you own and book you borrowed - you can't enjoy book you have borrowed forever. 4) More correct analogy would be cities running soup kitchens and serving food to citizens, ones who can and can't afford food alike. That would doubtless be an honorable thing, however, not something that is considered reasonable in this country. 5) If cities want to help deployment of wireless broadband, they should not fight the building of wireless towers. 6) If the concern is about poor people not being able to afford internet, provide monetary contribution to them, so they can buy access from anyone else. Or not buy, if the intarweb isn't their thing. But, preserve the choice of providers. -alex -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/ -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
RE: [--] - Re: [nycwireless] DSL Prime: Verizon Killing WiFi Wants people - Email found in subject
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Robert Liu wrote: 1) Read the Philadelphia business plan. If you are an ISP, municipalities like Philly are building a vibrant marketplace for you to sell your service. The city is the wholesaler...not the retailer. In that case, I have no problem. If the city provides free transport service to the ISP of your choice, and not the end-user service, that's fine by me. But that's *not* what the cities which actually *have* done the wireless broadband have done, so your argument is specious. 2) Again, read the plan. No tax dollars are used. Even the bonds are taxed, not tax exempt. I wish I could have unconditional guarantee backed by tax revenues (HINT: the only reason people buy bonds is because of that guarantee) in order to expand. Certainly beats having to borrow money against my house! 5) Cities like Philly aren't fighting the building of new towers. They aren't funding it making it much more costly for the wholesale venders. But they certainly aren't opposing it. Sure they are. Try to put up a wireless tower in your community, and see how complicated the approval process is, how retarded people are with regards to eyesores, etc. -alex -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
Re: [nycwireless] DSL Prime: Verizon Killing WiFi Wants people
Alex, first of all I want to say that I always appreciate your perspective, since I really respect what you do in this marketplace (which we both know aint easy). Even when I disagree with you, your arguments are well thought out and often bring out important points into sharper focus. In this case, you've brought out the secondary argument about the role of government and our tax dollars in a way I hadnt thought of it before. Which is: is there only one correct model for muni wifi? Unfortunately, I think you want to have it both ways, which I do find problematic. What I mean is this: if a municipality provides free wifi, then you object because, you say, they give away what you charge for (another point I'll disagree with later). However, if they put it out to the highest bidder (NYC lightpoles), which is less onerous on taxpayers, you decry it as shutting you out. I agree that the open model (Philly), allowing all ISPs to provide services is the best model. However, far more urgently, that model should be applied to all last mile RBOC wireline facilities. Especially fiber. As Im sure you know too well, the FCC has decreed otherwise, I believe to the detriment of our economy overall, and ISPs specifically. That is true lock out from an essential facility and unfair in the extreme. Because we've allowed private control of public telecom infrastructure, which was built as regulated monopoly, a public trust. In contrast to the re-monopolization of the wireline first/last mile, I dont think muni wireless is a threat to Pilosoft or Bway because they will not be giving away what we charge for. Will they have full coverage? Not any time soon, if ever. Tech support? email accounts? IP address? Despite your valiant arguments, I think my public library analogy still holds. Yeah, you are right, some rich people will eat for free (or read every new book for free), when they really should be our paying customers. But I ask you, how many customers has Pilosoft lost to free wifi? Now how many to cheap cable or Vz offers? Bway.net has picked up many customers because we encourage free public wifi sharing of their DSL connection. We haven't lost a single customer who said they could get their neighbors wifi signal instead. Cable? Lots. Vz? Lots more. Alternatively, do you have any plans to offer service in NYC as a WISP? If we gave folks Internet coupons (like food stamps) would you be building in these under-served nabes? Personally, I dont see a profitable business model -- so I see an important opportunity for government, perhaps with help from non-profits like NYCwireless, to step in and provide basic connectivity. -- Joe At 3:27 PM -0400 4/29/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Michael Stearne wrote: 1) This will complete destruction of independent ISPs - one of major reasons why we get customers is because we are not the incumbent cable or phone company. This may complete the destruction but aren't you blaming the destruction of the market on the people putting the final nail in the coffin? Didn't the majority of the destruction come from AOL, phone and cable companies and now you are defend Verizon who took more of your business than muni wifi will? AOL was never really a source of destruction - competition was fair. Destruction came after monopolies came into it. Yes, I think adding a free city-owned monopoly wireless provider *is* a final nail in the coffin. Stick to city providing wireless transport service to all comers, who then can provide end-user service, and I'll be fine with that. 2) At towns with for-fee municipal broadband and independent ISPs - essentially, my taxes are being used to compete with me. Doesn't anyone think that this is wrong? In that case, yes. But I think municipal access should be free for citizens. Private companies can add features to gain subscribers. You are saying that if a city gave a Yugo to each citizen, BMW would go out of business in that city. I don't believe this. Where does this end? Should city provide free food to everyone? Surely, that won't put McDonalds or SmithWollensky out of business. Just because *you* have a great idea to spend *my* tax money on does not make it good. And if you are talking about 'benefit to society' - you are very much wrong. If it is in society's interest to help the needy connect to internet *at their home* (note, they can already get internet at libraries) - give them wifi stamps (analogous to food stamps) with which they can purchase the internet service from anyone they want. Wireless or not. If it is in society's interest to run a wireless network (reducing the number of unsightly towers), then make city open the network to all ISPs, and sell transport service. ISPs then will be able to provide complete end-user service. 3) Your analogy with library is specious. There is a difference between book you own and book you borrowed - you can't
Re: [nycwireless] DSL Prime: Verizon Killing WiFi Wants people
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Joe Plotkin wrote: role of government and our tax dollars in a way I hadnt thought of it before. Which is: is there only one correct model for muni wifi? Unfortunately, I think you want to have it both ways, which I do find problematic. What I mean is this: if a municipality provides free wifi, then you object because, you say, they give away what you charge for (another point I'll disagree with later). However, if they put it out to the highest bidder (NYC lightpoles), which is less onerous on taxpayers, you decry it as shutting you out. Eh, its just like another monopoly, compare this with cable and phone service. There's no big problem if city-sanctioned (or funded) monopoly is an open service, where anyone can use it with few restrictions. I agree that the open model (Philly), allowing all ISPs to provide services is the best model. However, far more urgently, that model should be applied to all last mile RBOC wireline facilities. Especially fiber. As Im sure you know too well, the FCC has decreed otherwise, I believe to the detriment of our economy overall, and ISPs specifically. That is true lock out from an essential facility and unfair in the extreme. Because we've allowed private control of public telecom infrastructure, which was built as regulated monopoly, a public trust. Oh absolutely. In contrast to the re-monopolization of the wireline first/last mile, I dont think muni wireless is a threat to Pilosoft or Bway because they will not be giving away what we charge for. Will they have full coverage? Not any time soon, if ever. Tech support? email accounts? IP address? Despite your valiant arguments, I think my public library analogy still holds. Yeah, you are right, some rich people will eat for free (or read every new book for free), when they really should be our paying customers. But I ask you, how many customers has Pilosoft lost to free wifi? Now how many to cheap cable or Vz offers? There's no free reliable wifi anywhere in the market area, so this question *now* is premature. I'll tell you that we both will lose a large portion of our market if free reliable wifi becomes standard. Bway.net has picked up many customers because we encourage free public wifi sharing of their DSL connection. We haven't lost a single customer who said they could get their neighbors wifi signal instead. Cable? Lots. Vz? Lots more. Using neighbours wifi is not the same as using free service maintained by the city. joe sixpack wouldn't use their neighbours wifi because of possible security and reliability concerns, but they'd use city-ran wifi in a heartbeat.. Alternatively, do you have any plans to offer service in NYC as a WISP? If we gave folks Internet coupons (like food stamps) would you be building in these under-served nabes? Personally, I dont see a profitable business model -- so I see an important opportunity for government, perhaps with help from non-profits like NYCwireless, to step in and provide basic connectivity. As long as its an open network, I don't have a problem with any new builds funded by my tax dollars. You of all people should recognize danger of building yet another sanctioned closed monopoly. -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
