Mike Weisman on 14 Oct 2000 23:43:46 -0000 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> Re: spectrum speculation |
Kudos to Mr. Cisler for his informative background on the spectrum issues in the US. (Note: his comments seems to be unique to the US market.) October 2000 Scientific American has a very good special section on spectrum and wireless technology for the lay person. cisler wrote: > A few comments on spectrum as a public resource that Mr. Graham did not discuss. > > In the early to mid-90's Apple Computer (my former employer) expended a lot of > effort on the various initiatives to have the U.S. FCC free up a lot of > unlicensed spectrum. Part of this effort was to get a lot of the developers and > those who might use the technology to work on some bandwidth etiquette and to > outline spectrum needs. It was not exactly like standards working groups, but > it was close. Big companies would be at the table and say, 'do it our way or we > won't be in the coalition' and the rest knew that the FCC would not see the > coalition as a strong one. Other companies would throw out ridiculous > requirements and make the group's demand look ridiculous. There were lots of > small developers and firms who had good ideas but not much clout nor the same > amount of time as a large company who might dedicate two or three people to the > process. > > At the same time as the FCC was pulling in huge bids on licenses for some > spectrum, we (Apple) were encouraging them to open up more unlicensed spectrum. > Examples include the so-called Industrial Scientific Medical (ISM) bands (a.k.a. > the garbage bands) which are used my many devices: wireless phones, point to > point spread spectrum radios for Internet connectivity and LANs, radio > controlled streetlights, auto theft systems, and even wirelss microphones. > Because many manufacturers want to keep costs low, they have not built in > adequate protection against interference. One company that has a huge infusion > of capital from Paul Allen and Worldcom is Metricom that has a network of > wireless cells for an Internet service in variouls metro areas. At a MacWorld > conference in 1997, the use of the wireless mikes in the auditorium caused > interference with the Metricom network set up on the exhibit floor. A lot of > this wireless spectrum can be used for 'home networking' --control of devices in > the home and garden. Not just a wireless LAN of computers. > > During my final years at Apple our group worked on what is called the UNII, > Unlicensed national information infrastructure bands in the 5 Ghz range. > Companies that had paid huge amounts for licenses complained to the FCC that > giving this away for free would lower the value of their licenses. We argued > that it was like a public beach: you can have proprietary hotel beaches running > down the shoreline and still have some public beaches where anyone can swim, and > this does not devalue the hotel's beachfront. Spectrum was granted. > > Now, several years later 5Ghz radios are showing up, even though Apple closed > down its wireless group for a year or two in the late 90's and then revived it > by using older technology and bands (the 2.4 Ghz ISM band) for its Airport > wireless system. These are quite popular but are susceptible to interference > from wireless phones that use the same band. > > There are lots of other details that proponents of these bands disagree on: > power requirements, antenna design, spread spectrum techniques or whether spread > spectrum is all that good in the first place. > > However, this story is just one small part of what is going on, and the frenzy > over G3 wireless promises to see the Commission face very heavy pressures in the > coming year. Chairman Kennard will probably depart no matter who is elected, > and it will be a miracle if someone with a higher regard for the public and the > underserved is appointed. > > # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission > # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, > # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets > # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body > # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net -- Please respond to: Mike Weisman popeye@speakeasy.org _______________________________________________ Nettime-bold mailing list Nettime-bold@nettime.org http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold