« July 2005 | Weblog | September 2005 »

August 2005 Archive

Think Global, Act Local

Wi-Fi With Its Own Zip Code BusinessWeek Online does a good job of providing an overview of municpal wireless issues and the current state of the debate.

Posted on August 31, 2005 at 02:27 PM | Comments (0)

Seeing RED, Seeing Green

"The problem is that some people are still chasing smokestacks, but that buffalo hunt is over," said Joe Max Williams, who as executive director of the South Central Tennessee Development District tries to save jobs in 13 rural counties and lure more. "Manufacturing jobs are leaving us, and if we want to replace them we've got to have high-speed Internet access. That's what potential businesses looking to relocate ask all the time: 'Have you got broadband, can you get me a fast connection to the Internet?' " the veteran economic development adviser said.

Broadband means jobs, money to small towns This is a great first-hand description of why cities in our heartland are looking for broadband solutions for their towns. It's about jobs, economic development, and in the end, survival. Rural Economic Development (RED) is constantly on the minds for those cities that are living on the edge, where one relocated factory can raise the local unemployment rate by double digits. It's no wonder they see green when they learn that high-speed access can be the difference between landing a new high-tech employer and having them move on to another region that does have the needed 21st Century infrastructure.

Posted on August 31, 2005 at 02:25 PM | Comments (0)

Unwired Cities: Early in the Cycle, but Not Too Early

The growth of the Internet has paralleled that of most industries based on revolutionary technology. Canals, railroads, telegraphs, telephones, cars, radios, personal computers - all progressed (or are progressing) through four phases of development: boom, bust, mature growth and decay.

Irreplaceable Exuberance - New York Times I like articles like this that put things in perspective. According to the author, we weren't all insane in the late 90s, nor were we overly exuberant, so much as we were caught up in an inevitable cycle of a new technology. Hey, it happens. Well, OK some of you out there were a little over the top, but not me. I'm with this guy, it was a cycle-thing, and I was involved with "trial and error adaptation," busy helping to form a new industry.

The good news if you follow this line of thought, and I think it makes sense to do so, is that we are entering the longest and most lucrative of the four phases. Having gone through the heady days of Boom, and endured the humbling of the Bust phase, we now find ourselves at the dawn of the Mature Growth phase, which is a fun place to be. While not as fun as having a ping-pong table in your lunch room and massages on Friday afternoons, this is the more enduring fun of discovering a business need and providing a meaningful, competitive solution, with the wind at your back. Kind of like the difference between being infatuated during the first weeks of a romance, and settling into a long satisfying marriage with a compatible spouse.

That's where we are with municipal wireless networks. Cities are interested in this new technology not because it is some kind of fad. They realize that the Internet is entering a long-term high-growth phase and if a city is not on the highway, it will be left behind. We should all heed the cautionary tale of the Internet Boom, however, and not build networks that do not make financial sense. As the article says, "Gradually, through trial and painful error, we developed more refined ideas about what the Internet would become and why."

Because predicting the future is hard, we resist jumping in too early and making the wrong picks, but we also don't want to be left standing on the sidelines, watching the future pass us by. That's why I like the modular nature of wireless networking, which allows a tentative buyer to shop and then stick her toe in the water with a manageable project. So if we acknowledge that the Internet is no fad, and high speed access is the way to go, then recent measures taken by city leaders to ensure widespread access to the Internet must be seen as prudent, as long as the network can work as promised, the costs are reasonable, and there is a clear path to financial payback. To sit on the sidelines in this cycle would be to miss an opportunity, because this is no new Boom phase, but rather the continuation of the Internet Revolution that began 15 years ago.

Posted on August 31, 2005 at 02:11 PM | Comments (0)

What Stands in the Way of Unwiring?

As I said in my most recent newsletter, I'm enjoying blogging, and I hope you readers find some value on these pages. Peak daily visitors on the site since its launch just two short months ago has grown to just over 400 unique visitors. And Registered Users has grown to 186!

I conssider that a decent start for a home-grown effort like this, and I hope all of you readers who like what you see will not just keep coming back, but also go ahead and tell one or two more people to check it out, to help the community grow. For my part, I'm committed to adding more and more useful content over time and to continue to organize the content to make it even more useful for you as a tool to UnwireYourCity.

Poll Results

In keeping with my goal to build a community, I'm asking questions to better understand how you feel, as an informal means of interacting with readers on the site. The latest poll question asked, "What do you consider the PRIMARY constraint to deploying a municipal wireless broadband network?" Here were the results:

Cost/Lack of Funding Source 31%
Local Politics/Lack of Focus 25%
Regulatory/Legal Barriers 14%
Complexity/Lack of Knowledge 14%
Fear of Risk/Security 8%
Other 8%

What to make of these results? Well, I think it's significant that over half of poll respondents cited either cost or politics as being the principal impediments to getting a wireless network. Security, often mentioned as an issue with wireless networks, was named by less than 10% of respondents as a reason not to move forward. Apparently, security issues are not considered that big an impediment. I find it curious that cost should be the principal impediment, but also understand that most city budgets are under pressure these days.

In the middle of the pack, one out of seven respondents (14%) saw regulatory issues as the major impediment, and the same amount felt that network planners needed to know more about the issues before moving forward. I don't find these results significant, as some readers face signficant regulatory obstacles, and knowledge on wireless issues can vary greatly.

We can conclude from this poll that Unwiring a City is a complex policy decision that requires consensus buillding and significant planning. In all cases, a financial strategy is needed, and (in some cases), a legal/regulatory strategy. Finally, planners need a thorough understanding of issues involved with networks. What do you conclude? Comment below to let me know.

I'm confident that UnwireMyCity addresses these issues, and going forward this will be useful information for me to tailor content to ensure that these issues receive appropriate coverage by priority.

New Poll

Notice that I posted a new poll/survey today. I'm curious to learn what you think of our US government's approach to broadband. Specifically, do you think we even have a federal policy on broadband? (you know what I think from my blog last Friday).

Please let me know what else you would like to understand about community opinions on wireless issues and I'll post a new poll to survey our community.

Thanks for your support and keep coming back!

Posted on August 29, 2005 at 04:07 PM | Comments (0)

If You Build It, They Will Come

TriCities.com | Broadband no panacea for economy You know, when I saw Field of Dreams, I thought it was enjoyable, a little wierd, but still, a good movie. Hard to argue with Kevin Costner, Ray Liotta, James Earl Jones, and Burt Lancaster...and baseball...and fathers and sons and dreams for a better life. But who knew back then that "Field of Dreams" and the "If You Build It..." line would enter the business lexicon as short hand for the potential and risk of speculative investment. You hear that almost as much as these days as bad impressions of Arnold's "I'll be back."

This editorial states that broadband is not a panacea, that there will be more heavy lifting after any network is in place. I agree. Also, if the new connectivity is only used for playing high-speed video games, the potential will be wasted. I agree again, but I think that is an extremely low probability. There are people who use their PCs as video game players, but few would make the argument that the PC was a wasted venture.

Infrastructure has always been an enabler. The railroads were built and provided for the movement of physical goods, and economies flourished along their routes - ask Chicago or St. Louis about the impact of railroads. The highways and Interstate system were built and provided for more movement of goods, and dramatic increases in personal mobility - ask Ford and GM about the impact of roads. Both infrastructures were enablers, and relative impact depended on where the routes went.

We all know about some roads that go nowhere, and the weeds grow on them, and we wonder how they got built. Often there were politics involved, which trumped good business planning. I think it comes down to sound business planning, with anticipated revenues planned out to cover costs. But broadband is a special kind of highway, and there is no chance that its roads will go nowhere. This highway connects the world, and it also can be used to create a local Intranet.

As the Qwest executive said the other day, words to the effect that "we don't need a superhighway when a sidewalk will do." While those are inflammatory words, I think the lesson holds that networks should be built to serve anticipated traffic and needs, with growth in mind. Not every town or region needs fiber. His words should ring true as a caution against overbuilding infrastructure in sparsely populated areas.

So, granted, broadband is no panacea and it will depend on what purpose a network serves, and if its capacity and cost match the anticipated uses. But show me any rich trade route in history that went unused, show me any communications network that did not follow Metcalfe's Rule by incressing in value as more people joined it. The nature of man is to connect with others - we are social. And in today's world, information is the be all and end all. History is in our corner on this one, and the odds are great that broadband will bring econmomic benefits to the regions that invest.

I think the bigger concern is paving the streets with gold, when blacktop will do. With the relatively low costs of wireless broadband, and the many uses it can find, its hard to think of a more sure-fire thing to come across the technology threshold in a long time. It's a conservative bet. In the case of wireless broadband, if you build it, they WILL come.

Posted on August 26, 2005 at 04:15 PM | Comments (0)

More Plain Talk on Muni Broadband

ePrairie.com: Midwest Technology Business News I especially like these plain-spoken articles that try to cut through the partisan noise on either side of this debate over municpally-owned wireless networks. Bottom line: some will do it, many won't, most will not take undue risk, and risks brought up by opponents tend to be of the "sky is falling" variety - in other words, overblown.

Posted on August 26, 2005 at 03:58 PM | Comments (0)

US Broadband Policy: Reality Bytes

"The President set a goal of affordable, universally available broadband by 2007, and we're sticking to it. We are creating the environment to unleash all these forces, and it's happening."

from Advanced IP Pipeline | U.S. Broadband Policy Exists -- And Works, Claims NTIA's Gallagher

"I just wonder who in the United States government is at a level where they're seeing that vision...where they must do something to look into the future," he said. "I wonder if the lawmakers and the cabinet members and the senior people in our government understand how rapidly this is happening, how quickly the world is changing."

Bill Owen, Nortel's Chief from Nortel chief: U.S. needs new broadband vision

"The United States lacks a national broadband policy," according to the report released last week by the Free Press, Consumers Union and the Consumer Federation of America.

Group seeks faster broadband push

I've tried to capture a few articles on this subject for your browsing here. you can almost feel the heat going up in the room as the time for a new telecom bill looms. It's getting hotter in August in our nation's capital, and yet, it seems everyone is on vacation.

My take on this - in government and business, there are POLICIES and policies, and I suspect that the federal government's broadband policy that Gallagher references is the latter variety - bare-bones, minimalist approach; something on the order of the "double secret probation" that Dean Wormer doled out in National Lampoon's Animal House - it's there, but nobody knows what it is. There is a signficant gap between having the president say "We will have broadband everywhere by 2007," and having the FCC sell more spectrum for millions/billions of dollars and on the other end, being able to get on-line to download a video in Dimebox, TX. The US is a huge country and 2007 begins in about 16 months. Let's just say that I can extend a curve on a graph as well as the next guy, and unless there's a hockey stick curve in there somewhere soon, I'll remain more than a little skeptical. And it appears, I'm not alone.

So a US citizen in-the-know working for a Canadian company takes the US government to task for not providing more details and effort to address the growing gap between the US and world leaders in broadband provisioning, and the government official in charge defends himself with a vision statement by the President and planned spectrum auctions...next summer. IF we have a policy, where is it clearly laid out and how is it being used by industry for guidance?

Another way to assess a policy if any, is by results and comparisons to benchmarks. If we define broadband as > 10 Mbs and measure value in bits/$, the US looks even worse than when we use other measurements like household penetration (16th and falling with a bullet). And its not only the lack of real results that belies the confidence Gallager places in the country's broadband policy, but also the lack of transparency and clarity - if experts like this Nortel executive are not clear on the country's vision and policy, then there is definitely something lacking in whatever policy and vision we have as a country. OK, so we have a policy, but its weak.

No, wait, as consumer groups weigh in. They don't think we have one either. So Big Business and Consumer Groups are aligned??

The authors of a new report Broadband Reality Check: The FCC Ignores America's Digital Divide, highlight the status of the US (dramatically falling behind the rest of the world in broadband deployment) and urge Congress to enact laws that would encourage public and private entities to accelerate high-speed Internet deployment.

"The FCC and Congress never have seriously addressed the lack of competition in the broadband market; they have not moved to reallocate spectrum to promote new technologies and lower prices; and they have blithely applauded the incumbent industries that have kept the market narrow and the digital divide wide," the report states. OUCH! No pulled punches here. Broadband reality really does bite.

The report has loads of good arguments and graphics that back up its case. It would be interesting to see an FCC rebuttal, but I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you. Here are a few highlights from the report.

Broadband costs are high in the United States (consumers pay 10 to 25 times more per megabit than broadband users in Japan).

Broadband statistics paint a rosy picture over a not so rosy reality. If at least one broadband subscriber is listed in a ZIP code, then the FCC counts the code as being covered by broadband.

Internationally, the United States' ranking in broadband penetration dropped from 13th to 16th place.

There is little to no competition among broadband platforms, dominated (98%) by cable and DSL.

The FCC seeks to eliminate open-access policies.

Many municipalities have recently undertaken or are considering deploying wireless networks by themselves or through a public/private partnership. (a Ray of Hope?) However...

Industry is trying to quash local governments from undertaking such projects that would offer their residents affordable high-speed Internet service.

Public private partnerships hold promise, as witnessed by Intel's recent initiative to accelerate the deployment of various wireless networks in 13 cities (and that number could grow to 100 in a year or so).

The report's authors urge Congress to enact legislation to free the "duopoly domination" of cable and DSL providers.

"Congress should authorize any entity, public or private, that seeks to offer broadband services to American consumers, [to] open up more spectrum for wireless broadband and ensure open access to all high-speed communications networks," according to the report. "Advances such as these will promote a strong American economy, one able to effectively compete in the global marketplace."

I'll let the authors finish out this blog for me, they spoke so eloquently and do a much better job than I could in making concluding remarks on this important topic. It really is a great report and you should download it here.

Congress should take notice of these alarming trends. Wireless technologies can offer incredibly fast connections at a fraction of the cost of cable or DSL. But these technologies are being crippled by the wasteful allocation of the public airwaves and by incumbent-backed legislative efforts to stifle competition and innovation at the local level.

Congress must enact clear statutes that will free the broadband market from duopoly domination and promote new market entrants. Congress should authorize any entity, public or private, that seeks to offer broadband services to American consumers, open up more spectrum for wireless broadband, and ensure open access to all high-speed communications networks. Advances such as these will promote a strong American economy, one able to effectively compete in the global marketplace.

Posted on August 26, 2005 at 03:00 PM | Comments (0)

Texas: Addison in More Detail

Star-Telegram | 08/24/2005 | Debate arises over municipalities' actions on wireless networks This article digs a little deeper on the recent Addison wireless network deployment, profiled in a blog here yesterday. This article introduces the municipal broadband policy debate tie-in and discusses neighboring community projects. Recommended reading.

Posted on August 25, 2005 at 11:25 AM | Comments (0)

Intel et al Lend a Hand

Intel To Help Communities Worldwide Maximize Their Wireless Capabilities Intel, Cisco, IBM, Dell, and SAP have jointly created a Digital Communities program with 16 other wireless companies and Muniwireless.com to lend a hand to communities that seek to install a wireless network.

In this initiative announced one week ago, Intel Corporation said it would help communities use wireless technology and innovative applications to expand and improve services for municipal governments, businesses and citizens. Intel intends to make wireless access about more than checking emails and surfing the web. Those days are rapidly fading, as cities take a long, hard look at wireless networks as a means to improve their core tasks and business processes.

Under the "Digital Communities" initiative, Intel has gathered a diverse group of leading high-tech companies to help 13 "pilot" communities design, develop and deploy comprehensive solutions and services to enhance government efficiency, promote economic growth, foster greater community satisfaction and bridge the digital divide. The applications range from automating mobile workers such as meter readers and building inspectors to increasing the safety and enhancing resource management of first responders by remotely monitoring vehicle location to enhancing parent, teacher collaboration for improved student success.

In the US, Cleveland; Corpus Christi, Philadelphia and Portland, OR, are first up. Taipei, Taiwan stands out among the worldwide pilot communities using technology industriously today. These companies will provide services to these communities, and Muniwireless.com will track progress and catalogue applications and projected ROI benefits. It would be an understatement to project that this should prove a valuable tool for those of you planning networks. Way to go, guys!

Other companies participating in the Digital Cities Consortium include Accela, Airpath Wireless, Alvarion, British Telecom, CapGemini, CDW Government, Inc (CDW-G), Check Point, Civitium, EarthLink, iMove, Panasonic Computer Solutions Company, Pronto Networks, Szintezis Rt., Telindus, Tropos and Vertex.

Other countries in the first phase include Mangaratiba, Brazil; Dusseldorf, Germany; Gyor, Hungary; Jerusalem, Israel; Principality of Monaco; Seoul, South Korea; Osaka, Japan; and Westminster, United Kingdom.

Posted on August 25, 2005 at 11:23 AM | Comments (1)

Technology Daily August Series on Municipal Broadband

A In-Depth Look At Municipal Broadband This would be a good site to bookmark and follow this month. Already it includes 11 articles on different aspects of the municipal policy debate. Check it out.

Posted on August 24, 2005 at 04:13 PM | Comments (0)

Qwest v. Verizon on FTTH

Qwest: Slow is Good Enough? - Why 'Build Highways' when towns 'just need sidewalks' Here's a blog dialogue (a "blogalogue"??) I was tempted to join, but as usual, my comments ran too long to post in that type of forum, so I'm posting them here. But this is a great debate, for many reasons. Check it out and page down to the argument made by G. Poohbah, entitled The Problem is Who Decides. Poohbah then sets up an assumption that it is either Government or Big Business that decides our broadband fate. This is a flawed argument, which leaves out the impact that small businesses and entrepreneurs have on our economy. And another assumption is that fiber as the solution. When the technology is FTTH, yes, the numbers involved cut out a lot of smaller players. But wireless broadband sidesteps that issue and gets us suitable bandwidth in short order.

Those critiques aside, this blog is one of the most cogent arguments I read on this list, because it goes to the heart of the matter - expect big business to act in its own interest. The fact can be put quite simply: the RBOCs want to have their cake and eat it too. They want to be deregulated so they can pick their customers and set their own prices, but they want to have government back them to get new competitors (both municipalities and small WISPs, ISPs, etc. who would work with them) to stand down so they have time to implement their strategies unimpeded. And with all their cash and political influence, RBOCs are used to getting their way. And if I were an RBOC shareholder, that would be in my short-term interest as well.

But as a matter of public policy and long-term interest for all (including RBOC shareholders) there is a different perspective. The RBOCs have operated under an historical "regulatory compact," just as the electric investor-owned utilities did, wherein they received monopoly territories from the government so they could invest in networks and recover their costs and in exchange they provided quality service at affordable rates so that everyone could have service. Universal service works for all because networks get more valuable the more people join them (Metcalfe's Rule). While the Federal Telecom Act of 1996 tried to address this, it was overtaken by the advance of technology, and the intransigience of incumbent RBOCs.

A key point, however, is raised at the end. While RBOCs continue to enjoy the status of effective monopoly or duopoly network access providers in many markets, they are also busy with plans to bundle content and new services to be more competitive. It is this bundling of access and content while controlling network access that creates competitive problems, in my mind. To paraphrase the words of Iowa Qwest President Max Phillips, the people that own the roads don't own the cars also, and who wants a sidewalk when you can have a superhighway? The Internet works better with the highway analogy, an Information Superhighway, than as a railroad. RBOCs have a railroad view, and they want to own the tracks as well as the trains - a good trick if you can pull it off, but long ago the government decided that it was not in the public interest for John D. Rockerfeller and Standard Oil to collude with railroads, and we should see through it today.

Either RBOCs are regulated providers with open networks, and the FCC and the Supreme Court just decided they aren't, OR they're competitors that should have to compete and not be able to leverage control of Internet access granted them from their former monopoly status. But we are stuck in this transition period, where they're really neither of those two, so they try to leverage every angle that appears open to them. You got to hand it to them, they are trying to play the hand that they've been dealt.

As for FTTH, building a fiber network as a capital project makes sense only if the spreadsheet says it makes sense. If the ROI is unsustainable and it can't get good financing, then local government would be taking a big risk to finance it, and that's not traditionally the way that local governments are advised to do things. Where they can find a private partner to take the risk, then it may make sense and they should be allowed to proceed. Or as in the case of Lafayette, when the public supports it, then it should go forward, for better or worse. In densely populated NY and PA, Verizon thinks it makes sense. In sparsely populated Western states, Qwest doesn't. No surprise there.

I'm afraid that "forcing the phone companies" to build a FTTH network like we built the electric and phone networks, as logical an approach as that would be, won't be in the cards for Washington policy makers, however, given the direction they are going to cut RBOCs loose.

An alternative that is overlooked in this discussion of FTTH is the growing number of wireless projects that will provide a good-enough, immediate solution at low risk for areas that lack coverage, by a multitude of small players - again, from that website on John D. Rockerfeller, a good quote, if in a different context: "Les petits ruisseaux font les grandes rivieres" - little streams make great rivers.

Posted on August 24, 2005 at 12:20 PM | Comments (0)

Michigan: Grand Haven Revisited

Michigan Town Embarks On A Grand Adventure Technology Daily is doing a series of articles on municipal broadband networks in August, and this is the ninth article, revisiting one of the very first "hot cities," which got its network in 2004.

What did they find? While this network was initiated by a progressive mayor at the urging of Ottawa Wireless, a private provider named Azulstar stepped forward under a non-exclusive franchise to pay for the privilege of deploying and operating the network. And not unlike the pioneers of old, Azulstar got some arrows in its back as thanks for its troubles. Grand Haven "was almost one of the worst places we could have decided to do it," Azulstar CEO Tyler van Houwelingen said. "So we learned a lot." Topology and an environment somewhat hostile to wireless propagation hindered Azulstar, but they worked through it.

So one year later, Azulstar has done much learning and improved the quality of its network, and is working to gain customers away from incumbents Charter Communications and SBC. Azulstar has expanded coverage, but along the way, it has encountered a slow-down while negotiating for rights-of-way with a local electric utility.

That last statement, concerning a slow-down based on electric utility negotiations caught my eye. The risk of this impediment is one of the reasons I have consistently recommended as a first step that network planners cultivate a compelling business reason for the local utility to engage with the network planners. Electric utilities need a positive benefit from the network to get excited about hanging things on their poles. Without that, one risks project delays with a slow-moving unmotivated electric utility.

Posted on August 24, 2005 at 11:09 AM | Comments (0)

A BPL Fable: The Boy Who Cried Wolf

PC World | The next generation of powerline networking Here's good news for BPL proponents, with the advent of standardization coming to the powerline technology inside the home, HomePlug AV.

The long-awaited HomePlug AV specification for superfast networking through conventional electrical wiring in homes and small offices has been ratified, paving the way for products as early as next March.
The ratification of the spec was announced this week by the HomePlug Power Alliance, the trade group that developed the original HomePlug specification. The Alliance announced plans for HomePlug AV, the successor to HomePlug 1.0, nearly three years ago, citing the need for networking technology suitable for streaming high-definition TV and other digital entertainment through the home.

But this article cites the many claims and false-starts that this market has endured, which makes it hard to get going now that real progress is being made. It's hard to convince vendors, for example, to get behind a big market push when they've had so many false starts in the past. This is a technology that makes so much sense, but it has faced market challenges and faces an uphill battle for market acceptance, according to this article.


Posted on August 24, 2005 at 10:33 AM | Comments (0)

Digital Divide Growing?

Internet is dividing rich and poor - vnunet.com Well, this is a depressing trend, if it proves out as it seems it will...it seems that the very tool that is lacking for those on the short end of the Digital Divide - Internet Access - is now being used by those on the "have" side to select neighborhoods, which sociologists fear will lead to a decline in mixed income neighborhoods, and more physical separation of "haves" and "have-nots." The report looks at the effect of Internet-based Neighborhood Information Systems (IBNIS), software tools that allow people to select an area to live in based on such neighborhood qualities as schools, housing and income profiles of residents.

In a sense, its not surprising that those with tools will use them to better their situation and improve their odds. In the face of such rational behavior, it would seem that the best way to counter this trend would be to get more people on the Internet. Municipal Network, anyone?

Posted on August 24, 2005 at 10:26 AM | Comments (0)

Texas: Addison Teams with RedMoon BB

Addison launches citywide Wi-Fi The City of Addison had a party yesterday, launching their wireless network in partnership with local wireless firm Red Moon Broadband. Red Moon has had success by building networks in a ring around Dallas, going where Internet access coverage can be spotty, but populations are dense and in need of broadband. But Addison is a new, more public-focused approach for Red Moon. This time they are working directly with the city to bring broad public wireless coverage with mesh networking equipment provided by Tropos Networks, not only providing affordable wireless broadband Internet access, but also providing coverage for public events, for the airport in Addison, etc.

Given the growing acceptance of this public/private approach, I would expect to see more and more deployments like this in the days, weeks, and months ahead.

Posted on August 24, 2005 at 10:04 AM | Comments (0)

When in Doubt, Farm it Out

Most cities are now going the general contractor route, either because the technology seems so complex, or to avoid any political embarrassments from some misstep.

from The Seattle Times: Opinion: City-sponsored Wi-Fi's wild ride, by Neal Pierce, Syndicated columnist

With apologies for this blog title to the late Johnnie Cochran, it helps to make a point with rhyme. As this article makes clear, city leaders increasingly look to the private sector to help them get broadband, but not necessarily to the traditional sources of help on telecom issues. Cable and Telecom incumbents have squandered their logical leadership position and cities are turning to upstart competitors to help them put city networks in place. Most city leaders do not want the political risk that would go with running the network themselves.

But that doesn't stop incumbent-sponsored groups like the Heartland Institute from beating the drum about the risks associated with municipally-owned broadband (see The Heartland Institute - A Mixed Month for Muni Broadband - by Steven Titch. The facts are, articles like this tend to use a single example that contradicts the mainstream evidence to make their points, and invariably, the examples of poor performance by city-owned projects are dated fiber projects, not timely wireless examples. And in any case, the authors are singing a song that is increasingly irrelevant, as cities mostly work in partnership with private sector firms to hasten the penetration of broadband.

It will be a while until a federal telecom bill makes it through the grinding legislative process at the Capitol, so while the McCain Lautenberg bill offers hope of federal intervention to stop state legislatures from tying the hands of municipalities, it can be expected that more initiatives by incumbents will rear their heads in state capitals in the months ahead. Those cities that move diligently to acquire the skills and recruit the private sector partners will be winners if they get networks in place before their state leaders heed the incumbents' siren song of state-provided protection of large corporations from competition by municipalities, when in reality they are protecting large companies from competition with small private companies who seek to meet city needs.

UnwireMyCity.com encourages its readers to get educated, get busy, and make something happen. The opportunity costs of going without broadband are much more likely to be higher than the risks of moving ahead today, with technologies like wireless mesh that let a city dip its toe in the water, learn, and adjust its plans to provide the most benefit with the least risk. There is no reason to wait, and there is no reason to fear. The biggest risk today is in delaying development and implementation of an infrastructure plan, which will leave your city behind in the new global marketplace, and perhaps out of luck if your state lawmakers decide to take your authority away.

Posted on August 24, 2005 at 09:43 AM | Comments (0)

How To Unwire, Part III

In my previous blog, I related my perspective on steps I can take to stimulate interest in bringing a wireless municipal network to Austin, my hometown. Austin is a perplexing situation, because we have abundant resources and all the raw material to be a leader in this space, but its as if all of our broadband accessibility and hot spots inhibit, rather than promote the formation of a wireless network. Time will tell.

But large cities are still the exception when it comes to municipal networks. The action is in the smaller towns, like Washington, PA, profiled in an earlier blog: Pennsylvania: Washington (PA, not DC) may get Wi Fi. Here is wireless consultant August Michel's first-hand account of his experience in Washington, PA.

How I Unwired My First City

First I started with who knows who and laid that groundwork in networking.

I spoke their language. I figured out what they wanted to hear and what they did not want to hear.

I was patient and persistent but not demanding.

I will never forget when one board member talked to me after a meeting and told me how much he appreciated the fact we did not demand a decision by 3pm or the deal would be off.

Here are some ideas and methods that helped me "UnwireMyCity:"

1. More patience - don't be afraid to ask for decisions and timeframes but be prepared for delays.
2. Be firm and honest - Tell them upfront, what you are thinking and what you expect from them.
3. Know the politics but do not get involved in them.
4. Gather as much information as possible.
5. Always listen more than you talk - my dad always said that God gave you two ears and one mouth, use them proportionately.
6. Find your allies and give them reasons to trust you - don't be afraid to show some vulnerability.
7. Never be afraid to pull out the NDA - this will let them know you are serious.
8. Sell the story not the product - sell the sizzle not the steak. Make them see the true scope of how the wireless internet can revolutionize their city, e.g. police cruisers, ambulances, fire trucks, wireless security cameras, WiFi meter readers, flood detection, etc.
9. Try to learn who really knows whom. Find out who has the real money and power.
10. Find out who is building where and when - there are projects and plans that are sometimes years in the making. You will be able to offer WiFi services even during the construction phases.
11. Learn to speak their language - what can you offer them, money talks but it is not always about money. Make sure you communicate your ideas clearly. If you are too vague they will miss the idea altogether, and if you are too detailed they will not understand what you are saying. Try to find the balance between too much information and too little information (K.I.S.S.).
12. Never be belittling or condescending - always emphasize that there are no stupid questions. There will always be people that will not understand the steak, but make sure they are "sold" on the sizzle.
13. Read How To Win Friends and Influence People - it is more important than reading WiFi for Dummies

Remember you do not have to be an expert at everything. You are a stronger and better leader when you can say with authority, "I don't know the answer to that question, however I will get it for you as soon as I can."

For more information or consulting services contact August Michel of Confidential Consulting @ 412.377.7245.

Posted on August 24, 2005 at 09:28 AM | Comments (0)

Go Back to School to Tap the Latent Potential of Your City

Helping to find the solutions is a role uniquely suited to the university. It has the expertise, but perhaps more importantly is the most trusted agent of change within a community. The university interests are clearly learning and linkages, not power or financial gain. Equally important, the university operates on a principle of "shared governance." The idea of sharing power -- giving all the stakeholders a voice in the new smart community -- is long overdue. If there was ever a time for this concept to have community-wide applicability it is now.

from Defining San Diego's Future in a Flat World- Voice of San Diego, by John Egan

Leadership can be found in a variety of places, from on high, and from down in the ranks. In Kick the Internet into high speed | csmonitor.com, the argument is made that the FCC and Congress must provide the leadership to identify alternatives to the cable and telephone duopoly indicated by recent FCC and Supreme Court decisions. Citing the three branches of our federal government, clearly this view looks for leadership from the top - and while I believe that such leadership will come in time as it must for such an important topic, a more immediate source of leadership is showing up from our cities, who are not content to wait and are mobilizing today to meet their own broadband needs.

In The City : A Global History, profiled in the Books section on this site, Books and Whitepapers, Joel Kotkin demonstrates how cites have played an historic role in driving civilization forward, by concentrating vital skills and the craftsmen who innovate, so that they could make faster progress and pass knowledge down through generations. With the rise of nation-states in modern times, the role of cities faded a little, but we are now witnessing a resurgence of the city as the core of the Region. The Internet has collapsed borders, so that regions now compete against each other and it is the nation-states that seem to be fading into the woodwork, as Tom Friedman makes clear in The World is Flat (also in the Books section - if you haven't read this yet, check it out.). And the heart and soul of the region is the city.

But as everyone knows, cities large and small are often befuddled by long-term rifts and factions that seem to slow down progress at every turn. How does the modern city move forward to become competitive on the global stage, to position the best that its region has to offer? Arguably those cities that tap into their unique potential and find a way to harness their resources and work together will be the most successful, and in the networked knowledge economy of today, those cities that have flagship universities are positioned with research capabilities, cutting edge talent, and a youthful culture that can feed an innovative and risk-taking culture to set a region apart from others.

So, as the opening quotation states, San Diego is looking to its universities to provide the leadership its community needs to set itself apart as it plans for a broadband infrastructure, and other communities would be wise to follow suit.

In Austin, Texas, my hometown, the University of Texas is a world leading university, but it has a decidedly mixed success record at providing change leadership for its host community. Too often the "ivy-covered walls" (it's virtual ivy down here in Texas) have led university leaders to look inward, but things are changing for the better. I've written about the Science, Technology, and Society program and its Community Advisory Board on this site. I view the STS Board as a tool to help Austin focus on the potential of wireless for the community.

The challenge for me is to motivate Austin leaders, in the "most wired city in the US" to formulate and pursue a municipal wireless vision.

I said I would track my success at raising wireless as an issue on this site, so here's an update. One of the first steps in any planning effort is to understand where you are starting from. One needs to get a lay of the land, to survey the various interest groups and create a baseline that will help in creating the plan. What are the resources that you can bring to bear on your tasks? Start asking questions and see if you can find some allies to your cause.

The most recent activity for me in this regard was to help with a poll of area non-profits for STS. Not surprisingly, few of the respondents understood municipal wireless networks or were aware of the potential, and those that did said that bringing broadband to their constituencies (addressing the Digital Divide) would be the key benefit of such a network in Austin. I concluded that there's a need to raise awareness of the potential of municipal wireless in Austin among this group, who could prove to be allies for the cause of bridging the Digital Divide. But there are other resources to look to in this planning effort.

I've approached a few community groups so far, but have not had success to date in putting this item on their discussion agenda. But I've only just begun, persistence is key here as well. Next up to try to get the ball rolling in Austin will be to continue my work with the city's electric utility and potential third party providers, and also to approach city leaders to see about providing a catalyst. Austin will be host to the World Congress on IT in May 2006, which provides a convenient target to get a network in place, and they are interested in helping to promote a wireless network.

I've also talked to Mike Wolleben at www.Wimax.com about using some WiMAX equipment that is already mounted on a rooftop in Austin to do a demonstration project. The key at this point, I believe, is to raise awareness and pique the interest of the community, and I think that starts with a focused awareness campaign. With the upcoming Wireless Networking & Communications Group Symposium 2005 at UT Austin in October, I will have another opportunity to promote a local agenda with experts in our community.

So, stay tuned, and let me know how you approached your community to get the ball rolling. The first habit of Stephen Covey's Seven Habits of Highly Effective People is to Take Initiative, so I'd like to know how you have had success in getting started at bringing a wireless network to your community. Please let me know and I'll share it with our readers.

Posted on August 24, 2005 at 09:19 AM | Comments (0)

Rhode Island: Providence Unwires

Providence buys $2.3-million Motorola wireless system Providence joins the ranks as the latest city to upgrade its public safety capabilities with a wireless network.

The Mobile Data Communications Network being purchased from Motorola will increase the speed of mobile data access by nearly 100 times, and it will allow for the transfer of digital video and other high-bandwidth applications, the company said.

The city currently uses a cellular digital packet data wireless communications system that transmits data at less than half the speed of a home dial-up modem. The new network is scheduled to be operational early next year.

Motorola's Mesh Networks technology will power the system.

Posted on August 24, 2005 at 07:55 AM

California: Clang, Clang, make way for Wi Fi throughout San Fran

How much do we love our cities? Just look what they do for us, and think of the images they conjure up. Cities are leading the way in innovation, especially with regard to wireless networks. San Francisco is the latest city to step up to the leadership podium. And we love our cities, fondly giving them nicknames as if they were sports teams. Let's hear it for the City by the Bay! And while we're at it, check out the City of Brotherly Love, which announced another elimination, as ATT bit the dust, leaving two contenders for their pioneering wireless project. (See MuniWireless coverage here).

City leaders like Mayor Newsome in San Francisco (and Mayor Street in Philadelphia) truly demonstrate leadership when they embark on their public campaigns to bring affordable broadband access to all of their constituencies. We may have left our hearts in San Francisco, but it seems that Mayor Newsome was thinking of If-I-can-make-it-here-I'll-make-it-anywhere New York, New York when he cited this project as a model for the US, just after it was noted that San Francisco's initiative seeks ubiquitous connectivity anywhere, anytime - an especially difficult challenge in a city renowned for its hilly topography.

So, just what is San Francisco up to? They announced yesterday an iniitative to conquer the digital divide in San Francisco, by providing universal affordable wireless broadband access over San Francisco's 49-square miles.

First order of business is a Request for Information and Comment (RFI) released today that launches a 45-day public process to define how San Francisco can meet its goal to provide a universal, affordable wireless broadband network to everyone. Mayor Newsome referenced this initiative as Phase One of a broader TechConnect strategy that will bring the promise of technology to low-income and disadvantaged citizens.

TechConnect will connect all San Franciscans to the social, educational, informational and economic opportunities available online by creating public/private partnerships to provide technology equipment to those residents who can least afford it; by providing tools to help users make sense of the incredible array of information found on the internet; and by providing training support to teach residents how to use and maintain the equipment necessary to access
the wealth of opportunity available online.

As I reviewed the documents related to yesterday's press announcement by San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsome, I had images of all my trips to San Francisco. I could hear the trolley and smell the seafood on the wharves from my first visit; feel the breeze on my face as I drank wine in Sausalito and admired the Golden Gate bridge and San Francisco skyline, warming up for my trip to Napa; taste the chocolate at Ghiradelli Square (buying souvenirs, of course); and savor that fantastic meal I had in Chinatown while in the Bay Area for my brother's wedding. Cities like San Francisco are icons for what cities can be, and it is good to see the mayor putting San Francisco in the spotlight as a leader and as an example with this new municipal wireless project.

First the City of Brotherly Love, the Twin Cities, now the City by the Bay. Which will be next? The Big Apple, the Windy City, the Big Easy, the City of the Angels, the Live Music Capital of the World? Our cities have a place in our hearts. They have personality and we give them nicknames. And I believe that our cities will show us the way to the future with wireless networks. (Check out the USA Directory and US City Resource Guide for nicknames and other interesting facts on cities.)

Download these relevant documents to learn more (you must be a Registered User to download, so register today - it's easy).

Download TechConnect Press Release

Download TechConnect RFI

Download TechConnect FAQ

Download TechConnect Fact Sheet

For more information, contact TechConnect directly:
1. visit the TechConnect website at www.sfgov.org
2. Contact TechConnect via phone at 415-554-5008
3. Contact TechConnect via e-mail at TechConnect@sfgov.org.

Posted on August 18, 2005 at 09:50 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Broadband Growth Slows

Broadband growth slows in Q2 This is a good little summary of the current progress of broadband. I think its noteworthy that broadband penetration is tracked so closely. Buried in the text is a note that this dip in growth is likely attributed to college students closing accounts for the summer, implying that there will be a mirror bump in growth in the fall. File this one under broadband trivia.

Posted on August 17, 2005 at 11:23 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Networking is a One-Way Street

I've argued in this space that the more one knows about networks and how they work, the better off one will be, now that we are firmly esconsed in the Network Age. So when I see an article like this, Caught Up in Our Own Connections, which discusses the dangers of becoming ever more connected, I can only nod my head and agree, not only with author Thomas Homer-Dixon's assessment of the situation, but with his conclusions as well.

THE CASE: Risk of another major blackout will continue until huge investments of money, time and political capital are expended (don't hold your breath, but do hold onto your hat). Cheerleaders abound for all things network (i.e., the more connected, the better), which blinds us to the risk inherent in highly internetworked systems. For all the benefits of being highly connected, connectivity also brings additional risks (Asian Bird Flu, anyone? it could be on the next airplane landing right now). JIT production with lean inventories tolerates much smaller margins of error, so slack has a risk mitigation value if you don't happen to control all the pieces of the equation, and few networks do these days.

Cascading damages are the principal risk in a highly networked economy. That's what happened in Ohio and spread to Ontario and NYC two years ago. And on the management side, a too-complex system can become unmanageable when the manager is disconnected from the inputs needed for sound management. At the time of the blackout, this system included 6,000 power plants run by 3,000 utilities overseen by 142 regional control rooms. The straw that broke that camel's back was the fact that system rules were outdated, inappropriate and inadequate.

THE REMEDY. General principles for network risk management are clear: 1) distributed and decentralized production of vital goods (e.g., energy and food); 2) slack has an insurance role, so don't cut it out entirely; and 3) connect with caution and weigh all costs and benefits, remaining aware of risks.

This is a sound cautionary note at the right time. As a "network cheerleader," I welcome this type of discourse, because it is so pragmatic. Whether we like it or not, the world will get ever more complex and its people will become ever more connected. North Korea aside, the days of isolation are over. Disengagement is not an option, but we can make sure that when we do connect, we do so with open eyes, ears, and minds.

And with my open eye, I spy ... our most critical network at risk. In The Terrorist and the Grid, author Gregory S. McNeal, a research fellow at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law's Institute for Global Security Law and Policy, brings us back to the electric grid, two years later, citing a particular point of vulnerability, the electric distribution substation. Prof. McNeal calls on our political leaders to spend up to the $1 Billion he estimates is needed to protect our nation's grid from terrorist attack.

I would add that wireless networks can play a vital role to make electric utilities more reliable and safe. Such an effort to protect our most vital network will take Education, Awareness, and a Paradigm Shift to focus on future opportunities and threats, rather than traditional means to keep the lights on. Today's utility does not look out on the same world as yesterday's utility did even 10 years ago, so managing it to mitigate risks will require new ideas and approaches, and the courage to insist on adequate funding and the latest technology to make it work better.

Posted on August 16, 2005 at 09:18 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Public, Private, and the large Gray Area In Between

Anyone who exercises, or tries to (like me), knows how hard it is to get back in the swing of things after a little time off. I took the longest break from this blog yet, one solid week, and I also took a week off from regular lap swimming, based on "circumstances beyond my control." I've eased back into my exercise this morning, and now I'll do the same here. I've missed blogging this past week, and I hope that you've missed my blogs.

I had business travel last week, followed by a flurry of activity at home before the first day of school for my kids. We went to the Canyon of the Eagles Lodge for one last getaway before school starts. This lodge, built by the Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA), was a delightful escape from civilization. Located next to the Vanishing Texas River Cruise docks on Lake Buchanan, about an hour northwest of Austin, the lodge and the cruise are two institutions focused on providing a vista onto untouched Texas wilderness and a colony of eagles who nest in these beautiful canyons in the fall. Our trip was an expedition to check it out before returning in November, and it was a delight - if you don't mind the warnings about rattlesnakes, copperheads, water moccasins, cottonmouths, scorpions, fire ants, cactus - lots of sharp teeth and other pointy objects. It is Texas wilderness as it always has been, and some of us really like that. It's also a great example of the type of benefits a public institution can bring to a community when it focuses on the customer and can play well with others.

After spending time with Public Power experts last week talking about Municipal-Owned Utilities (MOUs) and telecommunications, I couldn't miss the connection of spending time in a lodge sponsored by a Public Power electric utility. That part was coincidence, so hang with me while I connect the dots.

Saturday afternoon, I read on an historical marker at Rattlesnake Point that Lake Buchanan dam was created to bring electricity to the Texas Hill Country via hydroelectric power, but the company went bankrupt before finishing. The government created LCRA in part to finish that dam, but also to carry forward a vision of rural electrification. LCRA went on to build a series of dams that not only brought affordable public power, but also flood control and water resources for a region, and some of the nicest lakes, all within an hour's drive of Austin. LCRA now markets its electricity to a number of MOUs, and on the side, promotes tourism with lodges and campsites like Canyon of the Eagles (managed by a private hotel services provider). LCRA also has a signficant amount of fiber that it uses to manage its system.

So let's hear it for positive unintended consequences. In their wisdom 70 years ago, the Texas government set up a unique quasi-public entity that has grown and filled gaps to provide ever more benefits for the public. No doubt, they didn't envision a lodge like Canyon of the Eagles, but hey, it works. When an entity, be they public or private, keeps their customers and their core mission squarely in front of them, the results are almost always a pleasure to behold.

I also encountered such customer focus when I spent time last week with Hometown Connections, a for-profit subsidiary of the non-profit American Public Power Association (APPA). Started in 1998, Hometown provides marketing services to vendors who seek to sell to MOUs (members of APPA), and serves a valuable role of advisor and counselor to MOUs on ways that they can better serve their communities, including bringing in new broadband opportunities.

It was an eye-opening visit, and I came away very impressed, not only with the job that Hometown is doing, but also with the enthusiasm, professionalism, innovation, and spirit of cooperation that these public power professionals showed through their work with Hometown and their member utilities, and the obvious pleasure they take in serving MOUs as customers. And they are excited about the potential of MOUs helping to bring broadband to their communities by way of metropolitan wireless mesh networks.

Left on their own, public power utilities will manage OK, but working together, they begin to thrive. Hold on for some acronyms here, a hazard of the industry. MOUs get deals on public power and other professional services through Joint Action Agencies like American Municipal Power of Ohio (AMP Ohio) and MEAG Power (Georgia). State Associations also provide noteworthy member services, for instance, the Florida Municipal Electric Association (FMEA), which is working to help utilites better manage future hurricanes, and the Indiana Municipal Electric Association (IMEA), which provides valuable information to its member utilities.

These organizations work together to improve the lot of their members and the communities they serve. Keep an eye on this space and look for some significant action over the coming months as they discover municpal wireless networks and bring broadband to their communities, not unlike the way that LCRA brought power to the Texas Hill Country 70 years ago. And what unthought of benefits will we be talking about 50 years from now? I hope I'm around to see.

Posted on August 16, 2005 at 10:48 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Municipal Networks: It's Working!

RBOCs wouldn't agree, but city-run broadband networks are a good thing for the telecom industry, according to respondents to Light Reading's latest poll: Muni Nets.

Light Reading - Networking the Telecom Industry In a conclusion that may seem obvious to those of us who are in the middle of this, municipal networks are working. Light Reading cites escalating conflict between municipal authorities who see universal Internet access playing an important role in local economic development, and service providers that see taxpayer-funded networks as unfair competition, the service provider argument doesn't seem to hold water with readers.

Of the 112 poll takers so far, 74 percent reckon municipal networks are a good idea for the industry. The growing number of public services provide high-speed Internet access to underserved communities where the telcos and cable companies are yet to deploy broadband.

Respondents further said they would be willing to sign up for service themselves -- 76 percent would buy broadband access from a municipal network and 73 percent would also be prepared to buy telephone or TV service from their city. And in another recent poll, 59 percent of Light Readers agreed municipal networks could help improve broadband penetration in the U.S., which is not even among the top 10 broadband markets worldwide.

OK UnwireMyCity readers - if you haven't taken the poll on the right side of this website - give it a shot and let's publish a follow-up poll that shows what makes these networks difficult to deploy.

Posted on August 10, 2005 at 07:26 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Pennsylvania: Washington (PA, not DC) may get Wi Fi

The possibility of bringing Wi Fi access to Washington is about to be studied. Washington, PA, that is, not DC. City Council in this small Western Pennsylvania burg voted last week to undertake a feasibility and engineering study for WiFi access.

August Michel, an UnwireMyCity reader and wireless services company owner, has talked with me about how wireless is progressing in PA after strong anti-muni legislation was passed last year. He forwarded this item to me and we will be talking about how a city gets Wi Fi in coming days. His company, Confidential Consulting, will conduct the feasibility study. In addition to authorizing the feasibility study, council voted to have Double Radius do an engineering study.

Everyone is pulling together on this one. Washington Hospital ponied up $1,000 to defray the costs of the study. When the idea was first talked about in March, others who expressed interest included Washington & Jefferson College, Washington and Trinity Area school districts, Penn Commercial, Millcraft Industries, NASCO and Washington County Chamber of Commerce.

Michel will send area businesses a questionnaire in the next few weeks to assess their interest and how much they would be willing to pay for WiFi access. Practical applications of WiFi being discussed include being able to provide live video from either a police car or ambulance directly to a 911 emergency dispatch center or hospital. Other applications involve the use of security cameras. The city also is looking to be able to use WiFi instead of its Gamewell fire alarm system.

Posted on August 08, 2005 at 07:51 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

More Broadband Rankings


About 71 million Americans will have broadband access by 2010, enabling 62 percent of U.S. residents to access high-speed Internet in five years, according to a Forrester Research study.

RED HERRING | U.S. Goes High Speed, Slowly Here's the latest in a number of projections about broadband penetration and where we in the US stand compared to other nations. By the way, not having read the Forrestor study, I'm just opining here on what I read in the article.

Red Herring acknowledges that 62 percent is a big leap from 2004's 29 percent, but then draws the inevitable comparison with the global gold standard for broadband, South Korea, with 75 percent penetration already. I've already weighed in on what I think of big country/small country comparisons (Canadian Broadband Penetration Trumps US), let it suffice to say that we are talking apples and oranges when we make such broad comparisons.

I would challenge some things I read in this article, notably the conclusion of the Forrestor analyst Maribel Lobez, who characterized broadband access as a "nice to have." In today's digital economy, that's like saying electricity is not essential, but "nice to have." As Red Herring puts it: a delay of widespread broadband access in the United States means missed opportunities for economic growth, innovation, and investment. Broadband access is hardly a "nice to have" in a hyper-competitive global econmomy - tell that to small towns clamoring for networks so they don't lose major employers who "must have" broadband to compete.

Forrester's survey, The State of Consumer Technology, surveyed more than 68,000 U.S. households to look at consumer interest in various technologies, found access to broadband grew from 19 percent in 2003 to 29 percent in 2004. The figure is a relatively rapid rate and far higher than growth in previous years; Mrs. Lopez attributed the rapid growth to a spike in DSL availability along with price points in the affordable $20 to $30 range. Broadband is moving into the fat part of the bell curve, where we can expect much broader market interest.

But then the article turned south for me, as Mrs. Lopez engaged in political speculation about taxpayer subsidized networks and broadband as a "universal right" or a "nice to have" technology. Red Herring does a good job of bringing out opposing analyst opinions on the value of broadband to an economy. It goes way beyond Internet access.

Indeed, Mrs. Lopez contends that the growth rate she predicts won't be enough to meet President Bush's 2007 ubiquity goal: Until we see true adoption of wireless technologies like WiMAX, along with broadband over power lines, which won't happen before 2008, it will be difficult to get much higher availability than 65 percent, she said. (what about Wi Fi Mesh networks?)

Notably, Red Herring highlights the US lag in broadband penetration as compared to its competitors worldwide (#12 and falling with a bullet). Acknowledging that small countries like South Korea are little threat to the U.S. economy (Thank You!), Red Herring cites competition from rapidly developing countries like China and India, although it is decades away. But they are coming on and there is no time for complacency. Come on wireless, and someone tell Mrs. Lopez about Wi Fi Mesh networks.

Posted on August 07, 2005 at 07:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Oregon: EZ Wireless covers 600 sq miles

When Pigs Wi-Fi - New York Times I had an image of the New York Times Pullitzer Prize-winning Nicholas Kristof in an ill-fitting cowboy hat, whizzing down an East Oregon highway in a pickup truck, with tie blowing in the breeze as he leaned out the window with his laptop to get a better wireless signal. In this editorial, Kristof plays up the "rural" angle, from the title to the ending line: The fact is, unless you're a cowboy here in eastern Oregon, you're behind the times. But never did I see him look down his nose at his rural brethren. Rather, he looked up to them for their innovation and accomplishments, and chastised urban leaders in the US for falling behind those out in the sticks.

Could we possibly see the rural areas take the lead in this new wireless movement, and the urban areas as laggards? It could easily happen, and here's why. One hundred years ago, technology was much more basic, and the rural areas were relatively much more backward. So when electricity came along, with its high infrastructure costs, investors formed corporations and went after major urban areas, same with telephone networks and cellular networks in later years. It took LBJ's political weight and the hard work of municipal utilitites, as well as rural electric and telephone cooperatives to get modern services extended out into the country.

We can expect wireless network penetration to be different, however. It actually helps that rural areas are lacking in broadband now (demand) and that their populations are less dense, their territories less attractive to the big guys (less competition). First, wireless in its new forms (Wi Fi Mesh and WiMAX) is dramatically less expensive to install than wired networks, and goes in much quicker. Second, technology has matured and not only do we have a tremendous array of tools at our disposal, we also have lots of lessons on how to "get the job done" from an entrepreneurial perspective. Third, low barriers to entry mean that smaller providers will be there when rural area governments or businesses decide they need wireless networks. Web sites like mine are trying to raise the awareness level of the potential of such public-private partnerships and soon the benefits of such networks will be more and more common knowledge.

So Kristof poses an interesting challenge - how will urban wireless networks develop? and when? We're waiting on some RFPs to wind their way through the process, and this is a key challenge in larger cities - this is territory worth fighting for, and cable and telecom incumbents will do all in their power to slow any interlopers on "their turf." I expect prices to come tumbling down where wireless networks are installed. And I expect prices to come down when cable and telecom DSL start to slug it out. Just not as fast.

This prevailing view is shared by an accommodating FCC, which views an unshackled duopoly of cables and telecom DSL providers as the quickest route to broadband, equating deregulation with competition. So as you listen to the telecom establshment talk about a broadband blowout prize fight between the cables and the telecom DSL heavyweights following the DSL ruling on Friday, don't be surprised if the rollout of broadband doesn't happen quite as quickly as you might expect.

There are political hurdles to overcome and a duopoly, if that is what we end up with in urban areas, can be expected to move at its own pace, especially if the telecoms stick to their Fiber to the Home or Fiber to the Curb plans. There will most likely be further excuses for why penetration is not proceeding apace, now that they have slain the regulatory dragon. "Progress takes time," you can almost hear them say.

Urban areas will no doubt get their wired broadband, and in time prices will creep down, and some wireless networks as well. But for now, as Kristof suggests, wireless networks in rural areas seem like a sure thing. It may be that to get on a wireless network for free or next to free in the next two years, you will have to get in the car and drive ten miles out of town. Wouldn't that be ironic, for those who witnessed electricity's rollout 100 years ago, to witness today?

Posted on August 07, 2005 at 05:23 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

DSL Ruling Will Be A Landmark

FCC eases rules on DSL providers A spate of articles on the Internet offer preliminary analysis of the FCC ruling from Friday, August 5. In case you haven't heard, the FCC took another step to "level the playing field" between the two dominant broadband technologies: cable and telecom-based DSL. See the other three articles at the bottom of this blog for alternative perspectives on the FCC DSL ruling.

Six weeks ago in the Brand X decision, when the Supreme Court disagreed with the 9th Circuit and reaffirmed the FCC's contention that cable broadband was an information service, and so not subject to traditional telecom regulations, we heard the final word on a long-held question - is broadband a telecom or an information service?

While Congress in a rewrite of the Federal Telecom Act of 1996 is likely to speak further on the regulation of broadband, the Supreme Court's action left the FCC with a perceived imbalance, because if cable broadband was information service, why wouldn't telecom DSL broadband be information service also? So they corrected this awkward policy position on Friday by giving telecom-based DSL the same treatment - its broadband service is an information service also, so not subject to telecom regulations, which will be phased out.

According to the telecom establishment, a broadband tsunami will be unleashed by this ruling, as the lack of control of their infrastructure (they were required to let competitors onto their networks) kept the Bells hamstrung, and prevented them from waging an aggessive rollout of broadband infrastructure. Now, finally, they can get going. But their reliance on wired infrastructure means that it will take time to deploy networks.

So what does cable/DSL broadband competition look like? We could look a lot of places, but my hometown paper offered a convenient article (Deals galore for Net access) today, so let's check that out.

Competition like we've become accustomed to with cellphones may be coming to broadband soon, according to this article. So far, I haven't seen it (I'm still paying $45/month for Time Warner broadband, reluctant to switch to DSL), but here in the most wired city in the US, maybe we'll be on the front row.

One way to cut prices is to hop from promotion to promotion, but providers have figured that out and tend to tie in a commitment, as with SBC, which has cut its price even more this year, down to $14.95 a month with a 12-month contract. And they're starting to break up service into levels, ranging from a little faster than dial-up to multiple-megs.

In recent months, SBC, Time Warner and other companies have been slashing prices, with cut-rate offers that make some grades of broadband as affordable as old-fashioned and far slower dial-up service.

Citing penetration of about 35 million U.S. households with some form of high-speed Internet access since it came about in the late 1990s, the Statesman says the target of the rate cuts is the estimated 36 million dial-up users (at the end of 2004) who might switch to broadband if the price were right — and who might then become customers for other services the companies sell.

Time Warner Cable, the dominant cable provider in the Austin area, responded to aggressive moves by SBC by promoting Road Runner Lite, a slower version of its high-speed service, for $19.95 a month, which I may consider, but I wonder how "lite" it is and if I'll notice the difference.

Broadband Internet service is moving from a novelty to a necessity, thus my hesitation to go down in speed in order to go down in price. I like my high-speed Internet. Would you seriously consider cutting your phone bill in half if it meant that the sound quality would go crackly now and then, and sometimes your phone wouldn't ring? I'm not buying that I have to go down in quality in order to get a discount. It's one thing when your standard of comparison is dial up, but another when you've been using high-speed for years. So, they are not focused on winning me over.

But a lot of consumers are more price-sensitive than I am. Clearly, this is the growth area for cable and DSL broadband providers, not only dial up users, but price sensitive broadband users. And there is more at stake than broadband, as the price skirmishes are part of a bigger war between cable and phone companies.

Each industry is trying to expand onto the other's turf. Both are offering broadband as part of a bundle of services that include phone, Internet and cable television. It's the so-called triple play that the industry believes will be the basis for business well into the future.

"Both these industries see where their rivals are headed, and they are trying to capture customers now and keep them," Brumfield said. "They are trying to rope in service to the home."

The goal is to lure new customers with bargain prices and hope they like broadband service enough to keep it after the introductory price expires.

What I hate is the irony of this marketing, where they seem to be begging me to switch. I don't feel loved by my broadband provider. Get this, they are actually nicer to the customers they don't have, than the ones that they do have - that's not real competitive behavior, in my book. Most of the promotional offers are not open to that provider's current broadband customers. And indeed, that was the case when I talked to Time Warner last week. So, I'm hesitantly banking on FCC Chairman Martin's wisdom, and will be watching from a ring-side seat as two of the biggest broadband providers duke it out in one of the most penetrated markets in the US. But I'm also promoting wireless at the same time, more or less written off in all the discussion this weekend - I really believe that a wireless network inserted into a duopoly wired network will keep all the players more honest, and result in even more competition.

Let's watch the Bells closely and the cables even closer. "The phone companies' voice business is already drying up," Brumfield said. "That's why they are making sure they get as much market share as possible as quickly as possible before the cable companies come in and eat their lunch with low-cost phone service. They are really trying to solidify as many customer relationships as they can before the real competition arrives."

SBC and its peers have been losing phone customers over the past few years, as more people rely on cell phones or switch to new services such as cable's Internet phone service... and Brumfield and other analysts said the cable companies are cutting prices grudgingly.

"The cable companies don't want to harm their profit margins," Brumfield said. "They don't want to get into a commodity competition."

Time Warner, Brumfield said, is not promoting Road Runner Lite on a national basis. "This is very much specific to markets where they are feeling some competitive heat."

See these three articles for further perspective on this complicated issue.

FCC removes DSL network-sharing rules | InfoWorld | By Grant Gross, IDG News Service This article by Grant Gross provides a good overview - picked up by many Internet news providers, so you will start to read the same article over and over again as you surf.

The Progress & Freedom Foundation Blog: Bravo on Broadband FCC protects property rights of telecom companies, finally coming to their senses. Pheww!!

PCWorld.com - DSL Deregulation Effort Sparks Opposition Consumers Union and other cons