>They seem to be actively pursuing it. They provide a lot of hotspots at >places like starbucks and allow DSL users to connect for free. SBC has >been doing it for some time, and now Verizon is as well.
Yeah, but it doesn't mean they'll realize its profitable to continue to doing it. OK, Let me give you an example.... of today.... Customer A calls in a support ticket for poor performance. (all business subs, with SLAs) PTMP CustomerA and C show intererence. To resolve had to install a PTP to Customer B (located 10 miles away.), so I was then able to change channels and repoint successfully, without harming Custoemr B that had different client side channel noise issues. As well, had to change channels around on 3 sectors until I got the Customer A to beable to survive the noise. I was able to do the channels changes because I had intiment knowledge of exactly where each customer was on each of the three sectors and would know whether I would interefere with all the sectors on my adjacenet two cell sites also. I of course had to make the various calls and emails to many of the clients to let them know and coordinate the down time, each time I did troubleshooting. I then realized I had a bug that caused a some CPEs not to switch the the right channel, causing them to stay down. Because of my experienmce, I know its firmware issue, and download and apply the firmware on the needed CPEs. I first have to get the down Radio CPEs back up, and am able to do so because I remember the scan tables, and know they probably are still sitting on the other channels in teh scan table. Eventually after about a day, I got working customers, customer C is working strong, but customer A is still not working idealy. Is it interference or bad radios? Only way to tell is more equpipment swaps. Drive out to Cusstomer B site, swap radio, and seems to resolve. In this process, about 30 customers were touched, all though there was really only one support ticket for Customer A being resolved. My point being, a Outsourced support company in India wouldn;t have been able to handle this situation, and it surely would not have been cost effective for someone to troubleshoot and make this repair who was not intimately invovled with the local environment. I just don't see this type of thing scaling for large telcos. Atleast not for SLA level broadband services. The biggest headaches I had was dealing with the national partner companies that were resellers of mine that were responisble for 2 or 3 of the customers. It was a pain in the next having a middle man between me and the customer, and it was even harder for the reseller to keep the end user customer updated without them getting upset about poor communication. My point being, sure many companies can work under the finance and a large company conidating them, but the value of the local area operated by a local company just never will go away with unlicensed wireless. I'll jump the hoops, because its my business, and I have stake in the end game. But if I was an hired employee, that ticket would have been left unrepaired because it would have been to much of a pain in the neck to deal with. LArge telcos don;t deal with it, becaues they ahve other optiosn that are more profitable to manage. Small WISPs deal with it, because its their only option to play in the game. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Wyble" <char...@thewybles.com> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 5:15 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] just attended broadband stimulus seminar and WOW..... > > > Tom DeReggi wrote: >> The one thing that had initially scared me was large players moving into >> wireless. > > They seem to be actively pursuing it. They provide a lot of hotspots at > places like starbucks and allow DSL users to connect for free. SBC has > been doing it for some time, and now Verizon is as well. > >> For example a Comcast or Verizon saying "hey, OK we'll use PArt-15 >> spectrum >> to, and apply for teh grants ". > > Except for the part about the ridiculous amount of transparency it would > bring. > > But that doesn;t scare me anymore. >> The reason is its to hard to make businesses work for unlicensed. > > Oh I don't think so. They have enough money to do it where they have > sufficient middle mile infrastructure built out. If they wanted to, they > would simply deploy wifi as the last mile instead of DSL. It's a well > understood operational model, as evidenced by the folks on this list. > Sure there are quirks here and there, but the vast majority of posts to > this list discuss business models, threats, and "can someone service > area x". Which is perfectly fine. :) I'm just comparing it to other > lists I'm on, where things are in the very early stages (like open > source GSM stacks for example). > > So the telcos simply didn't do wifi because they have existing copper in > the ground and make plenty from that. If they ever decide to go into > small areas, I can say with about 100% certainty they won't do anything > but wireless (at least in the typical consumer price point range). > > I mean isn't that what the WISPS are doing now? It's the only viable > model near as I can tell. > > This is why I think that the vast majority (say 90% or so) of the > broadband money should go to building out the middle mile from things > like LAMBDA rail. In fact they put in a proposal offering up their fiber > network for use to build middle mile off of. > > Then just hang wifi / wimax off of that. > > > It doesn't >> scale well. But it works well for small providers. >> I'm referring to manageing and troubleshooting the last mile is to >> difficult, unless the party is intimently involved with the last mile >> network. > > Um yeah.... verizon and sbc are all over that with a little thing called > DSL :) > >> Its hard to outsource it to central support on the other side of the >> country. > > They do that pretty well already. At least on my business class > connection. > >> Of course there will be consolidation, but I think consolidation will >> eventually start to become counter productive, as the consolidation >> starts >> to become to larger. > > Maybe yes, maybe no. I think it's hard to say. > > >> >> Thedeath of small wireless companies will not be from consolidation. It >> will be because an area will reach a state where it no longer needs >> wireless >> to the scale that will be large enough to support the small provider. >> When >> consumers are given the choice to have video over broadband, for the same >> price as broadband, most will likely choose it. >> >> The question is whether Satelite TV will survive? As long as it has a >> viable >> percentage of market share, there will always be a market for wireless >> broadband, that doesn't have to operate at fiber to the home speeds, to >> be >> valuable. Wireless is more than capable to adequately offer the double >> play >> (voice). >> >> When Fiber to the home is made possible by grants, its not the cable cos >> that are hurt, its the satillite providers that are hurt more. > > Well except that's not viable. Fiber is SUPER expensive and not a viable > option in anything but major urban areas. > > Wireless is far more bang for the buck. One can get a substantial amount > of bandwidth, and do QoS tricks etc. > > > But you all know that. :) > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
