Google to make white space wireless announcement in wake of FCC auctions

Details are a bit sparse, but according to CNET, in the wake of this week's non-defeat in the FCC spectrum auctions, Google is planning a press call to publicly discuss its intentions to continue lobbying the FCC to favor the pursuit of white space data transmissions. We know Google's all joined up with Microsoft, Intel, and a number of other triple-a companies in the white space coalition -- which intends to provide dynamic wireless access on shreds and scraps of unused radio spectrum, bringing the world a step closer to the magical land of software defined radios -- but exactly what G will be announcing we won't find out until next week.

[michas_pi @ Mar 22nd 2008 9:45AM]

Last.

[Slawek @ Mar 22nd 2008 11:13AM]

Vtec: Last

[michas_pi @ Mar 22nd 2008 11:23AM]

@Slawek:

VTEC is no HEMI.

[Peter @ Mar 22nd 2008 10:20AM]

Please let them do this. Wifi would be ubiquitous , so the cell phone companies could all go away and let VOIP take over. One day, Google will rule the world. And that will be a good day.

[Danny @ Mar 22nd 2008 11:29AM]

Nah, that would be a monopoly.

[Alex Padilla @ Mar 22nd 2008 1:10PM]

How would that be a good thing? I don't know about you, but I like competition, it breeds success (for everyone involved). Keep in mind that capitalism is a wonderful thing.

[Peter @ Mar 22nd 2008 3:58PM]

What's so good about capitalism? Think of it this way: Who would you rather have, a group of competing companies each trying to get your money from you, or a single organization that doesn't actually charge the consumer anything and innovates on its own?

In my opinion, a single entity offering something for free would always be better than non-free competition. Monopoly or not, I just don't care. You can't have competition with something like that, and if unfettered capitalism is held up as some ideal, then there will always be a need to charge for everything, so an idea like this would never even be possible. Capitalism be damned, I want what's best.

[Wisam @ Mar 22nd 2008 3:58PM]

Waiting for Skype and similar VOIP phones to come to the US. That would be a killer! Calling international, conferencing, sending and receiving files all over VOIP and almost for free.
Having a VOIP phone in which you can install your favorite VOIP software. Pocket Phone of the future.

[Sam Winter @ Mar 22nd 2008 5:03PM]

The problem is NOT the free market model, its the lack of responsible regulation in the USA. The only thing the republican FCC has accomplished in the last ten years was to label DSL and Cable broadband as an "information service" which doesn't require cable companies or telecom companies to lease wholesale access to the last-mile lines to competitors who want to offer retail broadband service to consumer, in effect creating monopolies/duopolies all over the country. I have lived many places (in the USA) and have NEVER had access to more than ONE cable company and ONE DSL company, and thats if you are lucky. Almost the entire US is the same. remember how you used to could get different DSL companies to provide service? not any more... Thats the consequence of republican lead government who only care to further big business monopolies and corporate profits while denouncing "restrictive goverment regulation". such incredible bullshit.

Now if you are in say London, or places in Europe you literally will have 5 different companies COMPETING to give you broadband service. Even in places where only DSL is available (no cable), you will still have multiple DSL providers competing for your business. That is a REAL competition driven "free market", and this is in "socialist Europe". That is how responsible, citizen-driven government agencies work.

*sigh*.. vote Obama!

[chezzo @ Mar 22nd 2008 5:32PM]

"Think of it this way: Who would you rather have, a group of competing companies each trying to get your money from you, or a single organization that doesn't actually charge the consumer anything and innovates on its own?"

No, think of it this way: if you were a large company with complete control over an inelastic market (i.e. few alternatives exist so most consumers are unresponsive to price changes), would you continue to offer the service for free? And where's your motivation to innovate?

Economics doesn't say that monopolies are necessary a bad thing - but they definitely are in this case, where the market is said to be non-contestable - the costs of entering (laying phone lines, building transmitters...) are so great they deter any new firms from entering. This means the monopoly can afford to be lazy, raising their prices and not innovating in the comfortable knowledge that no new companies can enter the market and undercut them with cheaper prices and better technology.

Thus ends the economics lecture...

[Alex Padilla @ Mar 22nd 2008 11:21PM]

"What's so good about capitalism?"

Well, for one, it lets everyone involved in it use this thing called "free will." Economically speaking, it enables competition, which ultimately benefits the consumer. Google's offerings are free because they are going against Microsoft and Yahoo, which also offer similar free, ad-supported services. If Microsoft or Yahoo didn't offer free services, do you think Google would?

Newsflash: Google Documents Professional, which is in direct competition with Microsoft Office, isn't free. Why? Because Office isn't. However, it is cheaper, which, get this, makes it a competitive market.

Another newsflash: Machiavelli says mankind is inherently evil. I think that's an agreeable statement. Healthy competition keeps companies on the straight and narrow.

[pathogen @ Mar 22nd 2008 10:23AM]

Doesn't matter the world will end in 2012 long before deployment.

[Emor @ Mar 22nd 2008 10:34AM]

They said that about 2000, we're not going to die in 2012, trust me :).
EMZ=]

[halkonlar @ Mar 22nd 2008 1:27PM]

I think the X-Files already has our doomsday set up. Matches with one of the major cycles of the Mayan calendar oh-so-loosely as well. But the way the Mayan calendar runs in cycles suggests that there will be a significant shift, not an end. Mayhap, wireless everywhere under the thumb of the Google/M$/Intel coalition of the billing empire is that thing.

[Corbo @ Mar 22nd 2008 3:57PM]

My calendar stops on December 31st 2008. Is the world gonna end then too?

[Wisam @ Mar 22nd 2008 4:00PM]

I'll be waiting for PS4 by that time :)

[Aguiluz @ Mar 22nd 2008 4:58PM]

@pathogen, halkonlar:

You guys watch too much of these stuff. Screw it. I really don't believe it.

[pathogen @ Mar 22nd 2008 9:21PM]

forgot /sarcasm tag.

[Rob @ Mar 22nd 2008 10:25AM]

I had read an article about 8 years ago stating that HD radio would deliver all types of digital information to computers... I wonder why that never worked out?

[ethana2 @ Mar 22nd 2008 11:20PM]

patents

[mattwier @ Mar 22nd 2008 10:47AM]

Interesting stuff here, Google! Whats with everyone and a 2012 apocalypse??? I mean that's only 4 years away, I really don't see how the world could change so much in just 4 years that the world will just end, also I'm pretty sure that NASA would know by know if there were some giant meteor headed our direction. But then again if I had all the answers I wouldn't be asking this question, would I?

[Raheem @ Mar 22nd 2008 10:54AM]

Who said anything about a meteor? Even if it was a meteor, don't we only monitor something like 3% of the sky? I think the stigma around 2012 is either the polar change of the Earth (which can happen instantly) or the movement of the solar system into the next astrological phase or something within the galaxy. It's not neccesarily the end of the world either, it's more touted as a change of times, or the next phase of consciousness.

[mark @ Mar 22nd 2008 11:11AM]

They're called polar ice caps.

The polar ice caps are melting at an exponential rate. Soon you'll see 90% of the world covered by water and all of your post-apocalyptic nightmares will have come true.

A struggle for gas and resources will ensue, society will break down, pirates will roam the sea scavenging whatever and whomever they find, people will develop gills, and 'smokers' on their jet skis will harass any attempt at a civilized society.

[Raheem @ Mar 22nd 2008 12:36PM]

Uh, no Mark, while your point is also applicable I was talking about the Earth's poles switching.

See: http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/3100

[Thaxium @ Mar 22nd 2008 1:24PM]

@mark

Great movie.
I, for one, cannot wait to be a pirate.

[mark @ Mar 22nd 2008 1:28PM]

movie?

[Sunny @ Mar 22nd 2008 11:33PM]

waterworld what? Also, don't forget about the increasing sun activity hurling solar energy towards earth around 2012 in addition to the magnetic & precession shift lol

[Shane @ Mar 22nd 2008 11:05AM]

Using 'white space' for data transmission is a BAD idea. The 'blank' spots in the spectrum exist for a reason...To protect LICENSED services! I'm sure many people would be upset if suddenly their cell phones didn't work as well because one of these 'white space' devices grabbed the channel when nobody was transmitting.

[SuperQ @ Mar 22nd 2008 1:22PM]

Most of the whitespace proposals I've seen are for use in between Digital TV transmissions, not in cellphone airspace.

DTV towers transmit at megawatts, and are spaced very far apart in the spectrum. They are easy to spot by the whitespace gear and then their frequency space is notched out of their transmits.

[Eric @ Mar 22nd 2008 2:41PM]

This sounds a lot like those FM transmitters some people use for mp3 players and satellite radios. There's a lot of them out there, and occasionally they take over my reception of the local low power NPR station. Very annoying when mobile, I can only imagine what will happen when someone tries it fixed. If you consider that many people will install directional high gain antennas the likelihood of white space transceivers causing interference is high.

[Eric @ Mar 22nd 2008 2:43PM]

That should have read "will install directional high gain antennas in fringe areas the likelihood of white space transceivers causing interference is high."

[Shane @ Mar 22nd 2008 6:24PM]

@SuperQ:

I realize that this proposal is for TV frequencies but if approved it may potentially be applied to other bands (FM, cellular, etc).

As Eric mentions there are enough problems with Part 15 transmitters causing issues on the FM band. I can't imagine what something like this would do to the airwaves.

[Steffen Jobbs @ Mar 22nd 2008 1:17PM]

That's just nonsense from "Waterworld."

Some religious radio station called "Family Radio" is constantly mentioning the end of the world is coming in 2011-2012, but they never say what is going to cause it. In their quotes from Revelations it seems like there will be some sort of global earthquakes or volcanoes occuring since they describe it as the ground opening up and spewing out all sorts of mayhem. It really doesn't sound pleasant.

[Kenneth F Meunier @ Mar 22nd 2008 11:23AM]

This should be interesting to see how the industry will respond.
Kenneth F Meunier

[Notbhavn @ Mar 22nd 2008 11:31PM]

The year 2012 or more specifically 12/21/2012 is a reference to the game Assassin's Creed in which the end has some puzzles that resolve that the world will end on 12/21/2012. OR, he could be talking about something entirely different.

[Raheem @ Mar 23rd 2008 11:42AM]

Lol, Assassin's Creed did NOT invent the 2012 thing. The 2012 stigma has been around since Mayan Civilizations (circa 200AD) predicted a severe change in the Earth around 2012. It's provoked hundreds of legitimate studies and texts, as well as quite a few crackpot conspiracy theories. Please do not attempt to educate yourself through sub-par computer games. :P

[halkonlar @ Mar 22nd 2008 1:32PM]

2012 is a piece of pop culture that comes out of studies of the Maya calendar system. It's particularly interesting to read about, in terms of time keeping. If you are interested in the 2012 thing, check the link I have provided.

http://www.levity.com/eschaton/Why2012.html

(see, English majors aren't completely useless, we just don't make much money :P)

[ma5t3rw1tt @ Mar 22nd 2008 1:49PM]

I really hope that Google is able to pull this off. We need more than just a simple way to get online. What I think they should do is offer wireless service, much like Verizon & Sprint does with its card and pay a low monthly bill. I mean I have personally looked at the rates of both companies for anywhere internet and OMG its to expensive.

Google needs something like this, and maybe if the FCC lets use the airspace for this, we can see more portable & faster internet for lower costs and bring more competition to the mobile wireless market.

[Eric @ Mar 22nd 2008 2:45PM]

Why doesn't Google propose they use the white space in the frequencies owned by the government? I'm sure they could spare a few kilohertz for the rest of us.

[Adrian Williams @ Mar 22nd 2008 2:51PM]

Just give it up already They still don't have a working prototype
/Ham Radio guys shut down BPL they will shoot this down also

[Robert @ Mar 22nd 2008 6:21PM]

Where's my jet pack and flying car? That's what I wanna know!

[roole @ Mar 22nd 2008 7:14PM]

Yawn. More blather and blah-blah. The usual hyperventilation.

Wake me up when something really interesting and different **actually** happens in the mobile phone world.

(Snore).

[Reader @ Mar 22nd 2008 9:28PM]

I heart google.

[CB17 @ Mar 23rd 2008 3:58PM]

For anyone who's wondering, the White Space effort is much bigger news than the 700mhz auction.

[Peter @ Mar 25th 2008 3:25PM]

There is an interesting talk about mentioning the whitespace devices and the battle of regulated spectrum users (eg. Broadcasters etc.) against the whitespace device promoters and exposes some of the political dirt behind.
http://videolectures.net/kiblix07_meinrath_wtrr/

(the WSD part starts at about 42 minutes).