NEWS: BlackBerry hacking peril exposed

One of the US's largest ever spectrum auctions kicks off this week, with

168 companies listed as applicants for a share of the AWS (Advanced Wireless Spectrum) band, which could support 3G or other broadband wireless services.

Auction 66 is for 1,122 regional licenses in the 1710-1755MHz and

2110-2155MHz bands. The seemingly endless and often highly technical bickering over the rules for bidding have finally been resolved, but continue to be at the forefront of discussions, as the FCC regulator starts to consider how far it needs to change a creaking system in time for the auctions of even more desirable former analog TV spectrum in 700MHz, due to take place in early 2008. The bidders

The level of upfront payments is certainly a strong sign of interest and commitment and reveals the likely major bidders - and so the likely big winners. The top 10 bidders alone put up almost $4bn in deposits:

1. DirecTV/Echostar/Liberty, 2m 2. Sprint-Cable Co joint venture, 7m 3. T-Mobile USA, 3m 4. Cingular Wireless, 0m 5. Verizon Wireless, 3m 6. Leap Wireless, 5m 7. MetroPCS, 0m 8. Cablevision, 9m 9. Nextwave Broadband, 2m 10. US Cellular, m

Gone are the days when the cellular operators largely had to bid against each other - often through smaller regional proxies - for valuable mobile-suited bandwidth. Now they are facing competition from cable and satellite TV firms and many non-traditional operators, encouraged by the US technology neutral approach.

[MORE]

Major victory for Motorola and Samsung

So there really is going to be an honest to goodness broadband wireless WiMAX network in the US, with tons of spectrum and an national reach, thanks to Sprint?s decision, leaked earlier yesterday that it will use the fledgling technology for an all purpose US wide network costing $4.5bn.

The decision is a body blow to Qualcomm, which has its incumbent Sprint CDMA mobile network revenues to lose, and which was bidding the Flarion Flash OFDM, from the company it acquired last August.

But for Motorola, at risk with something like 18 per cent of its revenues coming from Sprint Nextel?s IDEN mobile network, it is a major victory, landing the biggest network equipment contract for WiMAX that has ever been placed.

Motorola will also be asked to come up with brand new mobile handsets for the WiMAX network, as will Samsung. These are likely to be highly multimedia capable, dual mode, CDMA WiMAX handsets to enable roaming and a gradual transition to WiMAX from the existing Sprint CDMA network.

[MORE]

Coming on the heels of Nokia's decision to abandon the "shrinking" CDMA2000 market, this is more bad news for the future of CDMA2000, with Verizon as the only remaining major player.

On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 17:13:35 GMT, John Navas wrote in :

...

The service will compete as a full quadruple play, driving US broadband, telephony, data service and both fixed and mobile voice pricing down.

The beauty of WiMAX is that it can be built out as customers emerge that buy into it. For instance, a base station can be installed, and customers can emerge from unexpected locations and still be serviced because the system is a point to multi-point radio service.

...

Whatever happens, something like 40 to 50 MHz of spectrum could be made over to video services and that could provide something like 200 mobile TV channels.

However, Sprint is known to be interested in offering full screen TV across the network, to extend the reach of the cable operators, and it wouldn?t be a big surprise if the network had something like 20 to 30 channels of full screen TV broadcast on it, as well as 50 channels of mobile TV as well, and that should all fit comfortably into the Sprint spectrum and still leave plenty over to offer advanced data services, voice communications and roaming internet access.

Whatever happens, this contract will put WiMAX on the map and secure its future globally, it will drive a stake into the heart of the moribund US telcos and it will catapult Motorola into the top flight of network equipment makers.

Just what America needs... More TV channels.

No we can sit around and get fat in more places.

A_C

Some people will never have leave the McD's ever again...

On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 20:12:14 GMT, Kurt Ullman wrote in :

I agree in general -- I don't even have regular TV service -- but it's good to have more delivery choices. There are a (very) few shows I like (e.g., Deadwood), and it would be nice to be able to view them on demand wherever I might happen to be; e.g., sitting comfortably on a sailboat anchored in (say) Ayala Cove, Paradise Cove, Stillwater Cove, or even Fort Ross Cove. :)

Pocket Dish would fit the bill nicely. Pairs up well with a DVR.

On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 20:28:11 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse" wrote in :

Or iPod video. Thanks for the suggestion, but I'm talking real-time, not pre-recorded and after the fact -- we've already got portable DVD players for that (and the means to create our own discs). For example, we'd have loved to get World Cup soccer on TV while sailing, but were out of TV range, and had to settle for radio. Watching it the following weekend just wouldn't have been the same.

To my knowledge you don't get any real-time video from any provider. But what you said was "Deadwood", which is perfectly suitable for PocketDish.

On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 12:46:07 GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse" wrote in :

This thread is about real-time video over WiMAX.

| Whatever happens, something like 40 to 50 MHz of spectrum could be | made over to video services and that could provide something like 200 | mobile TV channels.

Good thing they are not expecting high definition on these mobile devices. But 200 to 250 kHz per channel could easily do standard definition with advanced compression technology. Or they coould back down things that mobile users tend not to need, like cutting the frame rate in half. And much of this depends on power levels and noise levels. Given enough power (which is a form of redundancy) you can get lots of bandwidth into a given fixed spectrum. But there isn't a lot of power hitting the antenna of a mobile user when the transmitter is 10 miles away. How many megawatts would these WiMAX transmitters be allowed to operate at?

| However, Sprint is known to be interested in offering full screen TV | across the network, to extend the reach of the cable operators, and | it wouldn?t be a big surprise if the network had something like 20 to | 30 channels of full screen TV broadcast on it, as well as 50 channels | of mobile TV as well, and that should all fit comfortably into the | Sprint spectrum and still leave plenty over to offer advanced data | services, voice communications and roaming internet access.

What do you mean by full screen? 480i30 or 1080p60?

| Whatever happens, this contract will put WiMAX on the map and secure | its future globally, it will drive a stake into the heart of the | moribund US telcos and it will catapult Motorola into the top flight | of network equipment makers.

I do look forward to that. I'm still concerned that it will just become another content controller ("sorry, if you want that channel you will have to subscribe to tier II and tier II first even though they are full of channels you have no interest in").

In the arena of TV broadcast, cable and satellite providers are still locking themselves out of a lot of sales because of their tiered sales structure. And broadcast (free OTA) TV? All but PBS is junk now days, and even PBS is migrating to junk more and more (I've quit donating to them because of that).

To the extent WiMAX will provide voluntary net-neutrality access and ala-carte programming, I think it could really tear into all the other markets.

That's a shame, and more than likely why their lineups are shifting.

On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 18:00:22 -0500, Jer wrote in :

Not really -- PBS chose the dark side, running commercials, and dumbing down programming. While there is still much to like on PBS, it's no longer "public" broadcasting and I likewise no longer contribute for that reason, although I do still volunteer for the pledge drives.

I'm not always happy with what PBS does either, but PBS is still a world apart from their commercial brethren. I continue my support so I can continue trying to make a difference where I think a difference is warranted.

On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 17:38:26 -0500, Jer wrote in :

I personally think HBO stands head and shoulders above PBS, which has depended for years on BBC hand-me-downs, except in news and public affairs.