700MHz band: future home to worldwide mobile broadband standard

If you've been losing sleep over not knowing precisely what was going to happen to all that spectrum space that will be freed up when the imminent analog-to-digital cutover takes place, your insomnia is about to be (at least partially) cured. The US of A apparently pushed hard for a worldwide consensus on spectrum use -- suggesting that a common approach was more reasonable than each nation choosing separate frequencies for next-generation services -- and sure enough, it ended up getting exactly what it wanted. Apparently, the 700MHz band will now be reserved for a mobile broadband standard accessible throughout much of the globe, including most of North America, Central America, South America, Europe, China, India, South Korea and Japan. Of note, Europe was able to land a concession that enables it to offer up "about half of the bandwidth available for mobile services in their region" compared to what is offered elsewhere, but the agreement definitely makes the forthcoming auction that much more interesting.

[Via RCRNews, image courtesy of toddemslie]

[DDay @ Nov 16th 2007 8:17AM]

Can't wait, but will it blend? Wait...

[L @ Nov 16th 2007 8:23AM]

"The US of A apparently pushed hard for a worldwide agreement on spectrum use, suggesting that a common approach was more reasonable than each nation choosing separate frequencies for next-generation services."

O rly?

"As it stands, US citizens can look forward to reaping the benefits of this move sometime in 2009, but most of the world will be waiting until 2015 before making this section of the radio spectrum available for mobile activities."

So, basically what those two chapter tell us is: We're all for global frequency standards, as long as WE define them...

[bondsbw @ Nov 16th 2007 8:30AM]

And that's a bad thing?

I don't know about you, but I believe in standards. And somebody has to suggest a standard before it becomes a standard... it might as well be the group that's ahead of the game instead of behind.

[riggs @ Nov 16th 2007 8:31AM]

so....japan?

[Chris @ Nov 16th 2007 9:28AM]

I am aghast!!! A country advocating its own interests??? Never in the history of international relations has this ever occurred!!!

[jdclarke @ Nov 16th 2007 10:26AM]

@bondsbw

Standards are great... too bad the US is not standard friendly on WCDMA's 2100, huh?

[energyvortex @ Nov 16th 2007 8:45AM]

@L

Nice assumption. Where does it say the delay is caused because of something the US is doing? Put the tinfoil hat down and don't talk about what you don't know.

In related news:
What the heck are they going to use the bandwidth for? Pay TV services on phone? So that the on-the-go-user that just has to see the latest CSI while travelling, can? *shakes head*

[Jared @ Nov 16th 2007 9:12AM]

700MHz is nice because it has much better coverage than current spectrum's used for cell providers. Because of this the networks are cheaper to roll out and you can provide service to more rural areas, in which there is still a lot of money to be made.

Anyone who wins the bid for the spectrum could do several things with it, such as sublease it, build out their own network (ISP, Cell, etc), strengthen their network (Verizon, ATT, etc).

Check out these two articles they do a nice job covering the subject.

http://gigaom.com/2007/03/14/700mhz-explained/
http://www.cato.org/tech/tk/070730-tk.html

[Jared @ Nov 16th 2007 9:13AM]

Forgot the graphical link. This shows how the three spectrum's compare in coverage.

http://gigaomnimedia.com/images/700mhzrange.jpg

[Chris @ Nov 16th 2007 9:24AM]

@Jared

Thanks for the articles!

[Mark @ Nov 16th 2007 10:26AM]

In the UK we're currently battling against this. If the TV industry looses this spectrum it will spell the end for any chance of getting free, over the air HDTV which this piece of the spectrum is perfect for.

The campaign can be found here http://www.hdforall.org.uk/ and is backed by the likes of the BBC, ITV, C4, Sony, Samsung etc.

[David @ Nov 16th 2007 11:13AM]

Well, some are battling this, not all. Why should TV remain privileged over other forms of communication?! Let them go ip as well, I'm all for net neutrality. I'd rather get free, over the air internet than what the crap conventional TV producers can force on me.

[Mark @ Nov 16th 2007 11:18AM]

If it is allowed got go to auction the telcos will pay £Billions, as they did for the 3G licences. When they're spending that much they'll be no way you'll be getting free anything on that bandwidth

[nikster @ Nov 16th 2007 10:25PM]

You are kidding, right?

You are *_battling_* to keep getting blasted with commercials, only interrupted by forgettable crap programming?

Why are you not battling to keep that spectrum free from the POS that is broadcast TV and instead use it for something infinitely more interesting, mobile broadband? Then you could choose to go to websites that blast you with forgettable content and idiotic adverts, and others could choose to get whatever they want over their IP connection...

[nikster @ Nov 16th 2007 10:28PM]

PS: Mark, that's why Google was asking the FCC to make this spectrum accessible by all. Different rules can prevent another 3G spectrum disaster.

Lets say whoever wins this spectrum is forced to share it with others under under fair use conditions. Sort of like the landline infrastructure.

Using it for TV is the worst option.

[Rob @ Nov 16th 2007 11:02AM]

And what are exactly the benefits to the population in general? I can see how the Verizons and others alike can fill their pockets by maintaining the current crappy service, but use the new spectrum for new services charging you a premium for them. If they were to say that all their networks would be migrated to the newly available spectrum and that prices will become more reasonable. Then, I'd consider it. But, keeping in mind how these people function, I don't trust them.

I hope the FCC thinks this one out very carefully. Otherwise, the lobbysts (corporate mafia) win, as usual.

[ADR @ Nov 17th 2007 6:19PM]

Exactly, in the great US of A we pay more than alsmost every other country for far crappier service. Our cell phone service is terrible and way overpriced for the features and our broadband internet is a joke. We pay $30 or more a month for the same type of service they get for $15 in Europe and $10 in Japan.

I really wanted Google to get a piece of the spectrum and roll out a $10-15 broadband service to teach the cable and telcos a lesson. Of course the lobbyists will make sure that never happens.

[Z @ Nov 16th 2007 2:18PM]

I'll just stick with my Sling box.

[Nex @ Nov 16th 2007 2:22PM]

from what i understand.. the TV band falls partialy into military radio freq's, in my home town.. when the f15's fly over, if you switch your tv to ch 99 even tho it is fuzzy and there is no video signal, you can hear the pilot talking.. .. anyhoo just my .02

[ak.anthony @ Nov 16th 2007 6:01PM]

Does this mean my old radio with 'TV' band selector will pick up cell phone calls?

[brian @ Nov 25th 2007 11:04PM]

No, all the new signals will be digital and encrypted. Well, at least digital. Unless you can decode the digital signal you will get nothing but noise.

[2dwireless @ Nov 16th 2007 8:09PM]

you don't have to wait for this, a new techonolgy
was invented 5 years ago and is hitting the airwaves
this spring T-1 Wireless under $20 T-3 under $85
and a new T-2 price not let out yet worldwide roll
out 7 billion dollar backers

2dwireless

[Bill Fold @ Nov 17th 2007 10:54PM]

Hey Engadget! I told you earlier this week or last that AT&T would be offering a fibre optic internet/TV/phone service in Detroit. Just wanted to let you know that my source for that information also told me that companies like AT&T and Google would be purchasing wireless bands previously occupied by analogue TV in an upcoming auction. This sounds like that, so let me tell you what else I have: there is more like this coming (i.e. there are more bands to be sold) and you can expect to see AT&T offering phone and Internet on them. Not quite as sure about Google, but stay tuned.