Discuss EVDO PCMCIA Cards, ExpressCards, EVDO USB, PDAs, Phones, Coverage and Mobile Broadband Cards.
Discuss Sprint & Verizon Coverage. CradlePoint CTR350, CTR500, PHS300, MBR900, MBR1000, MBR1200, PHS300. Discuss Improving signal with 3Gstore Antennas and Amplifiers.
|
EVDOforums.com
Discussion forum for EVDO users
|
Our sites Include:
EVDO Info :: EVDO Forums :: EVDO Maps :: EVDO Blog :: 3Gstore.com
To purchase your EVDO Card / Antenna / Amplifier / Router from the EVDO Experts, just contact us!
Follow Us On:
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mclass55
EVDO Heavy User
Joined: 17 Feb 2007
Posts: 131
|
 Posted: Fri Jan 08, 2010 5:27 pm Post subject: FCC to have a National broadband plan March 17 |
 |
|
The original plan date was February 17, has been extended 30 days
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30686_3-10429084-266.html
"The plan is to have Broadband service to all Americans. Developing a plan that can be used to get high speed Internet access to every American household is a bold undertaking. And it will likely be a costly one. The task force estimates it will cost between $20 billion and $350 billion to build new infrastructure and to develop new programs for spreading broadband throughout the country. The bulk of this cost will likely be paid by private industry. But the government must develop policies to encourage new investment. While much of the plan will identify plans for getting broadband access to citizens who don't have access, such as people living in rural communities, a large part of the plan will also consist of figuring out ways to encourage people who already have access to actually subscribe to service. The task force has identified price as one barrier." |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
fordrhs41
EVDO Heavy User
Joined: 29 Jan 2007
Posts: 100
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 08, 2010 6:50 pm Post subject: high speed internet |
|
|
The plan is to have Broadband service to all Americans. Developing a plan that can be used to get high speed Internet access
We need a definition of "high speed internet" It appears to me that some providers consider anything higher than 56k as high speed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Winter_Harbor_Oyster
EVDO User
Joined: 09 Jul 2008
Posts: 60
Location: Onemo, VA
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 09, 2010 2:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Definately a grey area here. I'm sure alot of us live in rural locations, and I know where I'm at, "broadband" seems a decade away if I can invision it at all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
otter5555
EVDO Fledgling
Joined: 14 Jan 2007
Posts: 17
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 9:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| not to sound negative, but i seriously doubt that the feds are capable of anything resembling a true national broadband plan based upon past performance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steve_52
EVDO Fledgling
Joined: 20 Sep 2008
Posts: 21
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 12, 2010 8:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Past performance?
The "feds" did a fine job of rural electrification, as well as getting phone service to every corner of the country. If it wasn't for the federal government, none of this would have happened because corporations didn't see enough profit potential in serving rural areas, which is the very same reason many of us cannot get real broadband speeds, and have to settle for 3G. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dario
3Gstore Employee
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 227
Location: Tampa Bay Florida
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| steve_52 wrote: | Past performance?
The "feds" did a fine job of rural electrification, as well as getting phone service to every corner of the country. If it wasn't for the federal government, none of this would have happened because corporations didn't see enough profit potential in serving rural areas, which is the very same reason many of us cannot get real broadband speeds, and have to settle for 3G. |
I Agree, they will come through on broadband access as well that is next on their todo list. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Osage
EVDO User
Joined: 01 Dec 2009
Posts: 89
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 12, 2010 12:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dario wrote: | | steve_52 wrote: | Past performance?
The "feds" did a fine job of rural electrification, as well as getting phone service to every corner of the country. If it wasn't for the federal government, none of this would have happened because corporations didn't see enough profit potential in serving rural areas, which is the very same reason many of us cannot get real broadband speeds, and have to settle for 3G. |
I Agree, they will come through on broadband access as well that is next on their todo list. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With all due respects to dario, I am far more pessimistic about any rapid progress.
To start out with, all we are talking about here in this month delay thing is laying out a plan for the FCC to have a plan. And in MHO, its not rocket science, if we are going to have universal broadband, the issues were well known even before the election of 11/2008, and in my mind, its the national interests against the greed and perceived short term interests of private sector telco's and cell phone companies. And as such its going to be a political issue in which the FCC is going to have to grow a backbone and tell the private sectors involved its our way or the highway. If the FCC had a plan to do that, why did they not hit the ground running instead of wasting one year plus dithering around delaying while doing nothing?
We also have to remember the past progress that was made in rural electrification and bringing universal phone access was made during the great depression. In a very different political climate that we have today even if the American people are in denial about the current economic crisis. The great depression was a time of greater political unity and today its all about political gridlock.
But yes, I live in a rural area, and as a new 3 G EVDO user for stationary internet, I just got tired of waiting for my monopoly telco, AT&T to upgrade their lines to DSL capable. But truth be told, I would much rather have vanilla DSL, even if its slower than the 3G EVDO I have now. For one thing it would be 1/3 the price of 3G EVDO, I would lose the 5 GB cap, and face it, the wired spectrum can be theoretically infinite while the wireless spectrum is decidedly finite. And worse yet, the wireless spectrum with its various frequencies is almost impossible to standardize.
So we definitely have to ask, WHAT IS IN OUR NATIONAL INTERESTS especially when the private sector is doing everything to act in the opposite of our national interests.
And maybe it can best be demonstrated with a tale of one city, namely Indianapolis, Indiana that I live only 30 miles from.
As AT&T and Verizon got the bright idea that if they could only bring Fiber optic to the home or within a half a miles in a population dense area like Indianapolis, they could bring in enough bandwidth to provide subscription based television, High speed internet, and phone service to everyone in the city. And drive everyone else like cable companies out of business, and then they could charge whatever the they could get away with. The end goal of any monopoly provider. Instead they got a disaster, with ruinous competition, its been great for the consumers in just Indianapolis as they have gotten great deals and super fast internet, but the super expensive investments have not paid off for the telco and cable providers and now they have all quit investing into the ruinous competition game. Meanwhile its been a total disaster for the rest of the State as they get no investment in improving infrastructure at all.
So will wireless be the better option, I for one think not. Even with the coming of 4G, the cell phone companies are overselling the spectrum they have, while they try to addict the country into buying bandwidth hogs like
iphones and the like. And if that trend continues, wireless is totally unsustainable. Worse yet, now the cell phone providers cast their greedy eyes into stealing the remaining spectrum still allocated to OTA television. A spectrum I still use and enjoy because I refuse to waste money on satellite television that requires me to buy 10 junk channels for every channel I might actually want.
And now we might ask, is satellite the answer for rural broadband? That is somewhat of a maybe, its priced as high as 3G EVDO, the consumer outlay in equipment is higher when we factor in the dish and the receiver, the latency stinks for VOIP, and if more people use satellite internet we are going to need far more satellites in the sky. Nor have satellite companies been very smart, efficiency would say have one dish that can do internet and television, but no, they have to be dumb and require two different dishes.
But lets say the FCC can get the Congressional granted powers they do not now have and can become the future planning force I think they should be. I would then advocate the following.
1. Demand the telco's who own the existing telephone lines upgrade them to at least DSL capable. With cell phone companies and the Federal government chipping in also.
2. For wireless, we must lose this crap that a cell phone type device only operates on a given providers network. Otherwise we will end up building 3 or four times as many expensive eyesore towers than the country needs to cover the country. And because the wireless bandwidth is best used for two things, we must find a balance between two competing factors. Namely (1) Non random access things like television OTA broadcasts that is broadcast once and can be used by hundreds of thousands. (2) Two way communications that is random access and only used by one or two people. The priority must go to the former but we must ration the latter because mobile communication has some importance.
3. In the short term we must subsidize the private wimax operator willing to enter the rural internet provider. But we must standardize the equipment to to get an economy of scale. And we must demand and not just ask the existing cell phone providers to grant cell phone tower access for their antennas because it is foolish to think we can afford to build new towers for what amounts to a temporary stop gap measure.
4. In terms of FCC powers and incentives to get the private sector to act in the public interests for a change, there are plenty of carrots and sticks that can be used. As it is the FCC can grant and with hold wireless spectrum and IMHO opinion, taxes should be used as a weapon to force such companies to act in the public interests. In my case, why should not AT&T be required to provide me 3 G EVDO at DSL prices when they refuse to invest a dime upgrading their phone lines they have a monopoly on. IF so forced, I would win, AT&T would have a powerful incentive to upgrade their phone lines, and I would no longer be using cell phone spectrum for internet once the DSL option became available.
As it is, the average American uses 15 GB/month of wireless spectrum, that use is expected to double in two years, yet I am capped at only 5GB.
Well, I eagerly await that FCC report coming out in two months, but without a real get tough FCC plan, I do not expect anything but business as usual while the American people will keep getting third rate service at premium prices.
But right now America is a hot bed of political apathy while lobbyists are well organized. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
im_electronic
EVDO Junkie
Joined: 27 Aug 2009
Posts: 226
Location: Covina, CA
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 12, 2010 12:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
the speed set for being considered broadband is 768/200. any ISP's/WISP's get your grant papers in now for some extra $$$. yaya government overspending. we'll still be the crappiest tech country in terms of broadband speed/price.
_________________
PortoBatMBR1000 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mclass55
EVDO Heavy User
Joined: 17 Feb 2007
Posts: 131
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 6:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
8 more days till the plan  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Luka
EVDO Junkie
Joined: 07 Mar 2007
Posts: 220
Location: Pacific Northwet
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 09, 2010 9:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Osage wrote: | But yes, I live in a rural area, and as a new 3 G EVDO user for stationary internet, I just got tired of waiting for my monopoly telco, AT&T to upgrade their lines to DSL capable. But truth be told, I would much rather have vanilla DSL, even if its slower than the 3G EVDO I have now. For one thing it would be 1/3 the price of 3G EVDO, I would lose the 5 GB cap, and face it, the wired spectrum can be theoretically infinite while the wireless spectrum is decidedly finite. And worse yet, the wireless spectrum with its various frequencies is almost impossible to standardize.
1. Demand the telco's who own the existing telephone lines upgrade them to at least DSL capable. With cell phone companies and the Federal government chipping in also. |
Totally agreed.
About 15 years ago, Verizon made a deal with the government. One that I know affected the area of Washington State, that I live in.
They agreed to provide DSL for all rural areas like mine, in exchange for something that I forget the exact details of.
I have faint memory that it was a deal to keep smaller businesses from moving in and providing internet services in competition with them. (Verizon.)
I moved here about 12 and a half years ago.
Once I moved out here, I kept calling, and/or going in to the company and asking when they were going to get DSL out here.
The first three years they kept telling me, "any day now".
The next three years or so, they kept saying, "We don't know. Maybe in about 6 months."
After that, they finally gave up the lies and simply said they do not EVER plan on getting DSL out here.
I am in an area where I barely get the evdo. I cannot get satellite. There is no cable. And of course, no DSL.
I live within -half- the distance they say is needed, from a local "office", "station", whatever they call it...
And the regional engineer/troubleshooter here, was talking to me in my own home one day, and said that the 'station' is already DSL capable. All they would have to do, is to plug in some sort of card, and I could have DSL.
They dropped the DSL plans, because they want a captive market for the FIOS based internet, once they finally get THAT out here. At more than 4 times the cost of DSL.. And I'll probably be dead of old age before they ever actually get FIOS out here...
Bottom line, if the gov REALLY wants to make sure that everyone has access to broadband, or something close to it, at least... then the best thing they can do is to enforce the agreements they made a couple decades ago, and force the telcos to make all their lines and service, DSL capable.
Seems to me to be the most econimical, the most efficient, and the most fair way of doing it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
orangepeel
EVDO User
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 66
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
One thing that could be holding up people like AT&T spending hundreds of millions expanding into rural areas is the fact that 4G will be implemented by the time they get the DSL built out to the rural areas,then everyone leaving the DSL for the faster 4G.
Now if you're talking about fiber optics,that's a different story.
Last edited by orangepeel on Sat Mar 13, 2010 12:27 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
orangepeel
EVDO User
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 66
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 12:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| im_electronic wrote: | | the speed set for being considered broadband is 768/200. any ISP's/WISP's get your grant papers in now for some extra $$$. yaya government overspending. we'll still be the crappiest tech country in terms of broadband speed/price. |
Yes,but we have a lot more land to cover than a small country like Japan. Montana is the same size as Japan.It takes a lot more cell towers and money to cover the square miles we have. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Maureen
Site Admin
Joined: 03 Sep 2008
Posts: 624
Location: San Diego, CA
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| We're still waiting on the full plan from the Powers that Be, but here is a quick article recapping the info that has become available so far: The FCC Outlines Its National Broadband Plan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mclass55
EVDO Heavy User
Joined: 17 Feb 2007
Posts: 131
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 5:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"•The FCC plans to move forward in creating an infrastructure that would allow 100 million American households to transfer 100Mbps "
Wow is that a misprint? 100Mbps? Most of us have 1.5Mbps and we think thats fast. I would kill to have 100Mbps!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Luka
EVDO Junkie
Joined: 07 Mar 2007
Posts: 220
Location: Pacific Northwet
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 6:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Between 20 billion, and 350 billion ???
A tiny bit of a spread there, isn't it ?
100 million households...
There are an estimated 114,825,428 households in the USA.
So that'll leave 14 million, 825 thousand, 428 households, without.
I wonder how many households are without, right now ?
And I wonder, once the dust settles, if the reality will be much different from what it is now ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Buy from the 3G Experts @ 3Gstore.com
MBR1200
Sprint MiFi FREE
Nexaira BC2
CTR500
MBR1000
CTR350
PHS300
CLEAR USB Modem
Sprint 250U 3G/4G, Free
Purchase an EVDO Booster Antenna
Purchase an EVDO Amplifier
Your Mac EVDO Experts
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
