|
|||||
FEATURED TOPICExaFlood - In a Jan 2007 Wall Street Journal editorial, Bret Swanson of the Discovery Institute coined this term to describe the rapidly increasing torrent of data transmitted over the Internet, soon exceeding exabytes (1 exabyte = 1 billion gigabytes). It's a flood a-comin' as growth rates of transmitted data approach the capacity of the Internet. This "flood" of data is a threat to some, an opportunity for others. ORIENTATION |
« Electric Utilities and Metropolitan Broadband - a Relatively Untested Opportunity, in Critical Need of Attention | Weblog | How Important is Broadband? Why Should We Care Enough to Change our Current Thinking, Anyway? » For a Change, How about Trying Cooperation and ConvergenceLet's Talk More about Broadband Infrastructure, Less about Individual Technologies One aspect of the events of this past week, I hope, will be an opening up of attitudes to a more technology neutral perspective when it comes to broadband communication. With an open mind, I hope we can begin to experiment with different combinations of technologies that provide custom solutions to different communities, and get away from arguments that pit one technology against another, and that seek to promote a one-size-fits-all model for the sake of mass consumption. Over the past few years, discussion on wireless and wired broadband has tended to fall in various camps that support one technology over another, Wi Fi Mesh v. WiMAX, cellular 3G v. Wi Fi Mesh, DSL v. Fiber, Fiber v. WiMAX. The problem with structuring the debate in such dualistic terms is that it starts with a biased argument that proceeds to create camps and promote divergence. In contrast, in the face of such a large challenge as national broadband infrastructure, what we all need is more cooperation and convergence, and more experimentation. And if that's not bad enough, in these divisive debates, there is often a confusion over terms - when we don't define our terms with a common language, we speak at cross purposes and our discussion risks dissolving into an incoherent babble. A quick aside, then: when it comes to terms, I urge you to check out this article on Unstrung The Decade of 4G - Wireless for a good discussion on the difference in "3G" and "4G," two terms that are often interjected in articles without a clear understanding of exactly what we are talking about. As a generalist business consultant with a technology minor, if you will, I view these technology decisions as a sub-category of a more important debate, which is centered around how we will use new technology options to improve our situations. While technology enables new lifestyle and business options, its more important to figure out how we do things with good business sense and how we make the best use of our limited resources. It's more important to determine how we can be more effective as individuals and how we can have better success in communities, before we zoom in on technologies and start making decisions that exclude options and push us apart. From that perspective, and with the backdrop of considerable press anxiety and analysis last week after some dramatic announcements that challenged the prevailing paradigm of large city unlicensed wireless broadband focused on cheap or free Internet Access, I offer up a new approach and perspective for your consideration. To better understand my alternate paradigm, first see an Op Ed I recently penned for Last Mile Magazine, entitled In the End, Local Community Support Is Essential for Last Mile Broadband. The gist of this article is two-fold - 1) underlying paradigms and assumptions control our process - we can change those to spur progress; and 2) public and private sector actors need to work more closely together, with heavy reliance on local community direction and control. First, how local communities handle other infrastructure can be used as a model for how they can approach broadband infrastructure. In some ways, building out fiber or wireless broadband infrastructure more closely resembles a road or electric network than it does a cable or telecom service. Such a paradigm shift changes the way a local government may go about bringing infrastructure to its community. Second, reliance on the private sector to build such vital infrastructure comes with significant trade-offs. There is a direct connection between the slow pace of broadband infrastructure construction in our country and the reliance on the private sector cable and telecom companies. An alternative for local communities is to put significantly more effort into Public Private Partnerships. We have only scratched the surface in this area to date. For a more applied understanding of this new perspective, see the RFP I wrote for my client recently. The City of San Marcos, Texas, working with MetroNetIQ, recently released this RFP for Broadband Infrastructure on July 2. I urge you to download the main document here now and look more closely at how this approach differs from prevailing city approaches that have been critiqued in the press with the withdrawal of EarthLink and ATT, as well as large cities like Chicago and San Francisco. (Hint: to get all the documents associated with this RFP, you will need to register at GovBids.com - see the eTexas Purchasing Group area of the site, register as a user (it's free) and then look for link for the City of San Marcos). When the City Council gave initial approval to proceed in October 2006, the Public Private Partnership was the predominate model, and like in most cities, city leaders were interested to see if they could find a private partner to bear most of the risk. Unlike most cities, however, getting a "free" deal - for either the city or the citizens - was never an upfront consideration for San Marcos. Call it nice to have, but not essential. Fast forward nine months to July, and the environment had changed considerably. We knew going in that the private sector was pulling back from taking risks with these networks. Accordingly, we designed an RFP that was unique on multiple fronts: A. Clarity of Goals - the RFP was very clear on what the city would bring to the table and what the city intended to do with new infrastructure when it became available. B. Open Minded on Technology - neither skewed to Wi Fi Mesh, WiMAX, nor Fiber, this RFP left the technology mix up to the bidders, based on the project goals and regional constraints C. Open Minded on Business Model - while expressing a preference for a privately-owned network, the RFP acknowledged the potential of any number of creative business models and asked respondents to offer an Alternative Business Model if they so desired. D. Open with Information - the RFP shared information the team had gathered inside city departments and was open to questions and comments E. Open regarding Synergy Options - the RFP is focused on wireless applications to be employed by the municipal government, including automated meter infrastructure (AMI) for its water and electric utilities, and is especially interested in the potential for synergy F. Open regarding Outcomes - city leaders expressed confidence on the potential of the RFP - they seek to hear what private sector respondents have to offer, and stand prepared to change plans and direction based on that feedback When a local community approaches a business opportunity with a clarity of purpose and an open-mind to possibilities, it presents itself with the lowest risk posture. By remaining humble and curious, a city can attract those private sector companies who seek to gain a foothold in a new industry. The written bids for this RFP are due in three and one-half weeks, on September 27. We will have a better idea of the potential of this new approach and perspective for local governments and communities to gain new broadband infrastructure when we see how the private sector responds to this invitation. And an even better idea when we see how the City of San Marcos reacts to what they find in the private sector. Let's keep our fingers crossed! And, let's hope that more cities adopt this open approach to experimenting in a new area of infrastructure that offers tremendous potential for local communities. Posted on September 03, 2007 at 10:19 AM CommentsPost a comment |
METRONET VENDOR DIRECTORYMY OTHER BLOGSWikiMetroNet - A work in progress, we are taking content from MetroNetIQ and from other sources and pulling together a Users Manual for Metropolitan Broadband, Wiki style, so that it will grow and users can contribute! |
|||
| Powered by Movable Type | ©2006 MetroNetIQ.com | Website Design by zilkoweb | |||