http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/ Engadget Comments for http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/
YAY 4 INTERNETZ!!!!! ]]>Feb 19th 2010 2:39AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Feb 19th 2010 2:25AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Yup, and by 2020, the 100Mbs protocol that seems lofty now will probably be the equivalent of dial up. In fact, 10 years ago people I knew that weren't techies tended to be on dial up.

Second, HELLO! I have 300 channels I'd like to give back to the cable company. If we could just buy channels ala cart instead of being force fed this illusion of value because of the number of channels, I think we could whittle all of broadcast down to about 40-60 channels. For me it'd be 15 tops, and thats including all the cable channels I watch. Ala cart ordering of channels absolves the value of these companies hoarding channels they do nothing but reserve for Polka channel, and so on. ]]>Feb 19th 2010 9:09AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/
When you watch channels over cable television, that isn't broadcasting. You're watching the content on a wired, physical network. So going a la carte wouldn't do anything to help alleviate the strain on resources on the wireless spectrum. They're speaking about broadcasters pushing content out on OTA spectrum.

Back to the point you were speaking of though, is there really any reason to even have "television" service anymore? It's the year 2010, just about anyone can stream 720p H.264 content. Just have the channels sell individual shows/monthly/yearly access to their content via their website. For example, if I want to watch Planet Earth, I would head on over to discoverychannel.com, pay $5 for a month of access (or $50 for a year of access, or $10 to download a copy of the show to keep), and then watch it.

The concept of cable television needs to die a fast death.]]>Feb 19th 2010 9:35AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Awesome idea, and thanks for identifying that flaw in my view -- clearly I overlooked that. :) I also think your suggestion is great for people like us with, 20mb/s download speeds.. but my grandmother might not be so agreeable to this. But why not have both? Perhaps the cable companies can exert pressure on content creators to not bypass them? But then, are they not a Trust, obstructing the market? Not to sound so naive as to think that doesn't happen. So streaming for 5$ per month direct from content creators, and then the ability to own content on a per item basis for some additional charge - all commercial free? Nice. Time for an 8gb RAID array. :-) Can I watch the WHOLE LIBRARY a content creator has created? Or can I only watch on their schedule?]]>Feb 19th 2010 8:28PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/
Bundling channels together lowers the overall cost of channels you like. Take away the bundles, potential viewership goes down, programmers can't charge as much for commercial ads, which will force the programmer to up his subscription cost.

And don't even talk about the fringe channels that would go under because nobody would pay the $20 a month they would require because of the tiny amount of people that watch them.

So yeah, let's unbundle the channels and head back to the days of 3 national networks..]]>Feb 20th 2010 1:22AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Feb 19th 2010 2:25AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Feb 19th 2010 2:28AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Feb 19th 2010 3:59AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Feb 19th 2010 2:31AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Hence the problem, there is virtually no competition to these guys. They each have their own "territory" and are the monopolies in those areas. I am very happy with Google's ambition for bringing 1 gbps to everyone and the FCC's decision.]]>Feb 19th 2010 2:38AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/
Except when companies like Comcast bitch and moan and can get away with it because they have strangleholds on the pipeline.

It's strange that the only way to free up more spectrum is to pay off broadcasters. Say, didn't Comcast just buy a majority stock in NBC? Hmmmm.]]>Feb 19th 2010 2:41AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/
Yes agreed. And if an ISP offers 1mbps for $1 a month in 2020, that is perfectly fine because there are consumers out there who will only need that much and nothing more, while there will be consumers who will really need a 1gbps connection and will be willing to pay more for that. ]]>Feb 19th 2010 2:44AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Feb 19th 2010 2:44AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/
There is a monopoly effect going on in many places, sure, but at the same time, it should still be market-driven indeed.

Google's announcement has really put a lot of ISPs on alert. If Google follows through and starts implementing FOTH in a lot of places, especially places that have no fiber right now, it will terrify a lot of ISPs, and there will be a massive scramble at that point to increase speed and lift bandwidth caps.

It's happening, but you just have to let it happen. While I would like to believe the FCC's policy could work, and I support faster internet across the country, I also know that customers would, indeed, pick up the tab for such improvements. Companies don't invest heavy capital into complying with government regulation. That falls under what is essentially a business tax. And those types of costs get passed on directly to the customer. So it's really just a tax on you. When it comes to stiff competition, however, they tend to be capital intensive projects... they're not as directly passed on in the same way taxes would be.]]>Feb 19th 2010 2:47AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/
You realize that Google is only doing this BECAUSE of the inaction that you're advocating, right? Businesses like Comcast have no obligation whatsoever to offer a better product if no one else will. That's why they cap bandwidth, try to control content, and charge out the ass for even "basic" plans. I'm all for free market, but wake up people. Consumer demand is supposed to drive innovation. "Letting it happen" only makes the world stagnant.]]>Feb 19th 2010 3:09AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/in cases like these, the only force worth a crap in the market is the government.
stop playing this card and understand the real world importance of the government in a mixed market system]]>Feb 19th 2010 3:42AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Feb 19th 2010 4:01AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/
Except in this case many of the companies operate in local monopolies that were granted by the government. Thanks to that supid move originally now the fed needs to step in and help clean up their mess.]]>Feb 19th 2010 7:20AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Feb 19th 2010 8:53AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Feb 19th 2010 11:35AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/
I agree. The government can act like a red-faced CEO and demand this, that, or the other, but when it comes down to it you can't ignore the realities of the market. This is like the government coming to you and saying, "We've racked up a lot of debt. In fact, your share is about $300,000, and we demand that you pay it off within the next month." Guess what. Ain't gunna happen.]]>Feb 19th 2010 4:26PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/
Huh? You contradicted yourself. I am saying exactly what I said - Google is doing this precisely because no one else is. That's called a competitive edge and is one of the cornerstones of the market doing its thing. Apathy has destroyed or nearly destroyed many companies while other companies came in and made a better product... take the Detroit 3, for example. Only now are they fixing themselves.]]>Feb 19th 2010 11:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/
Let's skip 100Mbps and go straight to Ludicrous Speed.]]>Feb 19th 2010 2:33AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/
+1 for tipping the hat to Spaceballs.]]>Feb 19th 2010 3:10AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/i have that shirt :)]]>Feb 19th 2010 3:52AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Feb 19th 2010 6:32AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/
Sir shouldn't you buckle up?]]>Feb 19th 2010 9:58AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Feb 19th 2010 2:37AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/
im hooked up with comcasts's extreme 50 here in philly. 50 down 10 up... pretty balls to the wall]]>Feb 19th 2010 2:40AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Feb 19th 2010 2:53AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Some sites i can DL large programs from at a quick pace and some are caped at like 200 kbps. Still the most ive got was like 2 MBps down from Microsoft site. It's all going to depend on whatever server you are getting your info from. ]]>Feb 19th 2010 6:39AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Feb 19th 2010 9:01AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/
Well, us lucky people in "fly-over country" are stuck with a lot less. I have 1.5 down and 300k up. But, I'd rather have lower speed than live in a bigger city, just personal preference.]]>Feb 19th 2010 4:30PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Feb 19th 2010 2:40AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/
Or they could, y'know, use their massive stockpiles of cash from pure profit to reinvest in their infrastructure. Or, even more crazy idea: if EVERYONE has access to Ludicrous Speed, economies of scale start to kick in. More people, lower cost per person.

!*$@ ISP oligopoly!]]>Feb 19th 2010 2:48AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/
We already picked up the tab, to the tune of $200 billion dollars in surcharges that were added to our phone bills in the 1990s. In the end, the telcos got to keep all that money and they did very little to live up to what they promised in return.

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20070810_002683.html

> Over the decade from 1994-2004 the major telephone
> companies profited from higher phone rates paid by all of us,
> accelerated depreciation on their networks, and direct tax
> credits an average of $2,000 per subscriber for which the
> companies delivered precisely nothing in terms of service to
> customers. That's $200 billion with nothing to be shown for it.
]]>Feb 22nd 2010 5:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Feb 19th 2010 2:48AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/
FCC: "It's too slow. Make it faster!"
ISP: ""Okay."
*price goes up by 300%*
FCC: "It's too expensive. Make it cheaper!"
ISP: "Okay."
*availability drops to nil*
FCC: "It's not widely available. Make it more accessible!"
ISP: "WE CAN'T."
FCC: "Here, we'll throw money at you."
ISP: "YAY FREE MONEYS! ... We still can't, though."]]>Feb 19th 2010 2:49AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Feb 19th 2010 2:50AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/and yes, other countries enjoy faster speeds for much less.]]>Feb 19th 2010 3:45AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/
Other countries are 1/60th the size of the US. I can implement gigabit networking in my house, but that doesn't mean the same method will work for my entire neighborhood.]]>Feb 19th 2010 4:17AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Feb 19th 2010 7:12AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Feb 19th 2010 3:09AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/
Really never? I'm pretty sure 15 years ago when everyone had 33.6 modems people were saying we'd "never" have 50mbps, well here is my latest speedtest (comcast docsis 3.0): http://bit.ly/amjaD2]]>Feb 19th 2010 3:10AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/
Or 25.

or even 15.

So "never" is extremely likely in areas and states like NC.]]>Feb 19th 2010 10:02AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Of course higher bandwidth is great, but you have to think about how much bandwidth we are really going to want to adequetly support +10 years of technology.]]>Feb 19th 2010 3:18AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Feb 19th 2010 10:07AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/Feb 19th 2010 3:20AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/19/fcc-seeks-faster-internet-for-america-more-spectrum-for-wireles/
and if you live in one of the US's main you have fairly fast internet options as well. but lets compare apples to apples. The article is referring to those Americans that live way out in BFE where the only high speed internet option is either Satellite or through cellphone network. What are the average speeds offerred to people in Fly Creek Australia (just south of Darwin) compared to someone in say Herculaneum missouri (just south of St. Louis).

]]>Feb 19th 2010 11:30AM