NTIA chief's comments on subsidizing non-fiber telecom infrastructure as "escape hatch" raises questions

Do the BEAD rules mean satellite and other non-fiber services won’t be eligible for funding?

Again, no. It’s true the NTIA in its BEAD rules said it will count areas covered only by satellite broadband or service based on unlicensed spectrum as unserved and also expressed a preference for fiber. However, Davidson said he expects satellite and other non-fiber technologies will receive plenty of funding.

“This is an infrastructure project that’s designed to last for years. And we do put our thumb on the scale on the most resilient, future-proof technologies that we can,” he said. But NTIA knows “there has to be an escape valve for states. And for the really high-cost areas we fully expect that there will be states who have significant portions of other technologies.”

Source: NTIA chief answers 5 burning broadband funding questions

Alan Davidson, the NTIA administrator, didn't elaborate in this piece as to what those other non-fiber to the premise (FTTP) technologies will be. States can authorize Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program grant funding for up to 75 percent of project costs in high cost areas, with the 25 percent match waivable. These are defined in the rules as areas with higher than average construction costs for projects where at least 80 percent of homes and businesses cannot order service with minimum throughput of 25Mbps down and 3Mbps up.

Davidson is quoted as specifying satellite as one of the fiber alternatives. But satellite has been around for years in these areas, calling into question why it would need subsidization to expand it. Moreover, it's a substandard, costly option that no one really wants to rely upon for connectivity. Satellite is also omitted from the BEAD rules as a form of reliable service where it is the only service option.

The other possible technology is fixed terrestrial wireless. The BEAD rules implicitly allow funding of fixed wireless using licensed spectrum or a mix of licensed and unlicensed spectrum as they recognize it as "reliable" service. As with satellite, fixed wireless has been around for many years in areas of the nation as a stopgap until FTTP can be deployed, calling into question the need to subsidize its expansion. It's best suited to areas of the nation with relatively flat terrain and modest tree growth since it utilizes frequencies that require a clear line of sight to end users -- areas because of these attributes are also likely to be less costly to build FTTP.

Dismal state of U.S. telecom modernization enters new dilatory phase, prolonging infrastructure deficiencies

The dreary state of the modernization of America’s deficient telecommunications infrastructure -- already more than two decades tardy when it comes to the task of replacing metallic legacy telephone and cable systems with fiber optic to the premise infrastructure (FTTP) – is entering a new dilatory phase. Inspired by fellow blogger Steve Blum of Tellus Venture Associates, I’m dubbing it the “magic radio” phase. The goal: forestall FTTP infrastructure investment and instead experiment with various wireless technologies. As Blum correctly nails it, it’s based on “eternal hope that magic radios will appear one day and render wireline technology obsolete.”

It’s wishful thinking driven by the continued misguided reliance on undercapitalized investor-owned players like Verizon, AT&T and Google Fiber. All are looking into fixed premise wireless technologies, with Google Fiber the most recent, putting its FTTP builds on hold last week while it searches for the right radio magic. They all like the idea of employing wireless technologies for premise delivery because no one player has the many billions of dollars necessary to build out FTTP, spawning a search for lower cost alternatives.

The problem is the physics of radio spectrum are even more constrained than their finances. There’s only so much data than it can carry. Higher frequencies can carry significantly greater amounts. But only over such short distances that their use would require fiber to be brought so close to customer premises that the hoped for savings by avoiding FTTP deployment would be severely diminished. Not to mention the fact that higher frequencies are easily blocked and subject to interference without an unobstructed line of sight.

Google Says It's Very 'Serious' About Gigabit Wireless | DSLReports, ISP Information

Google Says It's Very 'Serious' About Gigabit Wireless | DSLReports, ISP Information: Alphabet CEO Eric Schmidt told shareholders during the company's annual meeting on Wednesday that Google Fiber is extremely "serious" about using fiber as an additional avenue to deliver additional broadband competition to stagnant markets. "To give you an idea of how serious this is," Schmidt stated the executive had a "lengthy" meeting on Tuesday with Alphabet CEO Larry Page and Chief Financial Officer Ruth Porat to discuss the company's wireless ambitions.Those ambitions include testing the viability of millimeter wave technologies and 3.5 GHz wireless broadband as part of an ongoing trial in Kansas City. "There appears to be a wireless solutions that are point to point that are inexpensive now because of the improvements in semiconductors," Schmidt said. "These point to point solutions are now cheaper than digging up your garden and so forth."

Fixed premise wireless IP certainly costs a lot less to deliver telecom services to homes and small businesses. But it's no magic bullet and there's a cost tradeoff involved. The physics of radio frequency spectrum impose a natural limit on throughput as more premises share the available spectrum. That means Google Fiber will have to push its fiber relatively close to premises to feed lots of microcells in order to offer quality service that won't degrade like that of a busy coffeehouse or hotel when lots of guests are on the establishment's WiFi service. The constraints are explained by Google's Milo Medin in comments he made at the 2013 Broadband Communities Summit, excerpted in a post on this blog (See No. 2). Higher radio frequencies like the referenced millimeter wave technology can carry more data. But the tradeoff there is they are easily obscured by buildings, flora and terrain, severely limiting its viability as a premise IP delivery technology.

It will be interesting to see how Google Fiber negotiates the tradeoffs if it continues to pursue this.

Motley Fool item on 5G as premise service overlooks #FTTP

AT&T and Verizon's 5G Ambitions Are Cable's Worst Nightmare -- The Motley Fool: When it comes to picking a cable Internet provider, you usually have one (maybe two, if you're lucky) options. Time Warner Cable (NYSE:TWC) and Comcast (NASDAQ:CMCSA) provide Internet to about 71% of new Internet subscribers in America right now. That percentage is expected to stay about the same if Charter Communications' purchase of Time Warner Cable goes through.

The near-duopoly of cable providers in many regions of the country is a long-standing problem -- and wireless providers may have found a solution. You may already know AT&T (NYSE:T) and Verizon Communications (NYSE:VZ) are in the process of testing 5G networks, which will bring much faster and reliable connections than even 4G LTE. But what you may not know is that 5G could also be used as an ultra-fast wireless connection for home broadband, too.

How 5G home broadband works.
Cellular connections work by sending out long-range signals from very large towers, but 5G home broadband would work a bit differently. AT&T and Verizon are testing out what's called "fixed wireless" in which a home wireless router would receive a signal from small cellular boxes (called small cells) placed much closer to your home than large towers.

Missing from this Motley Fool story is the cost/benefit tradeoff discussion comparing 5G to fiber to the premise (FTTP). Wireless does indeed have greater throughput capacity when the signal doesn't have to travel far such as in-building Wi-Fi. But it will take a lot of fiber installed relatively close to customer premises to support those small cell sites. So close, in fact, that it raises the question as to whether 5G makes sense as a premise telecom service delivery technology considering the small additional cost of bridging the short distance between small cell sites and customer premises with a direct FTTP connection. A connection that is far more future proof, less subject to interference and obstacles such as hills and foliage and offers far greater carrying capacity.

AT&T to deploy "wireless local loop" fixed premise service in high cost areas

AT&T will apparently use wireless technology to provide fixed premise Internet telecommunications services using funding from the Connect America Fund (CAF) to subsidize infrastructure costs in high cost areas of the nation. The U.S. Federal Communications Commission announced this week that AT&T accepted $428 million in annual subsidies from the CAF to serve 2.2 million rural consumers in 18 states. Since the FCC requires CAF recipients to provide connectivity of "at least" 10Mbps for downloads and 1Mbps for uploads, the wireless gambit could potentially meet that standard. AT&T's wireless strategy was communicated to the FCC in a letter dated August 27, 2015 (H/T to California-based Steve Blum of Tellus Venture Associates):

We anticipate meeting our CAF Phase II obligations through a mix of network technologies, including through the deployment of advanced wireless technologies on new wireless towers that will be constructed in previously unserved areas. We will diligently pursue the necessary tower siting and permitting processes so that these new towers can be completed in a timely manner.

As previously mentioned in this space, the so-called "wireless local loop" (WLL) infrastructure strategy proffered in 2014 as part of AT&T's proposed takeover of DirecTV will also help AT&T meet its universal service obligations under the FCC's recently adopted Open Internet regulatory scheme classifying Internet as a common carrier telecommunications service. The strategy will also provide alternative premise service delivery infrastructure as AT&T retires its legacy copper cable outside plant.

The upshot for AT&T customers: Those that were never offered DSL service when AT&T rolled it out more than a decade ago might now see premise service roughly equivalent to DSL sometime in the next five years while those outside the very limited range of its U-Verse triple play DSL-based service could find themselves switched from legacy DSL to WLL.

An unresolved problem, however, is as Internet bandwidth demand continues its inexorable rapid rise, the WLL technology will be obsolete as soon as it's deployed and falls short of the FCC's current minimum benchmark for Internet service of 25Mbps down and 3Mbps up adopted earlier this year.

AT&T’s planned “wireless local loop” plant could help it meet its Title II universal service obligation

When AT&T began the regulatory review process of its planned acquisition of DirecTV one year ago, it proposed to offer fixed wireless Internet service to about 13 million residential premises in its service territory not offered Internet service in order to improve the deal’s odds of gaining approval. These premises were never offered AT&T’s legacy ADSL service after it was introduced more than a decade ago. And even if they were today, ADSL would fall far short the Federal Communications Commission’s speed-based minimum standard for Internet service of 25 Mbps for downloads and 3 Mbps up.

Now that the FCC’s rules deeming Internet a common carrier telecommunications service under Title II of the Communications Act are going into effect requiring Internet service providers to “furnish such communication service upon reasonable request” under Title II’s universal service and nondiscrimination provisions, AT&T may be seeking another, more important role for its planned “wireless local loop” fixed wireless plant. 

Specifically, helping it meet its universal service obligations. With so many premises in its service territory refused Internet service for a decade or longer, AT&T could face a potential barrage of complaints and penalties if these premises remain without premises Internet service and it continues to say no to service requests.

However, as arstechnica reports today, AT&T’s fixed wireless service is expected to provide connectivity of up to 20 Mbps – below the FCC’s minimum standard for Internet service. The only way to get more wireless bandwidth is more fiber backhaul bandwidth and/or more wireless transmitters. That means AT&T would likely have to spend more than it would like on its planned “wireless local loop” plant to bring service up to the FCC’s standard in order to keep itself out of hot water with regulators.

Colorado legislation would redirect high cost telephone subsidies to Internet infrastructure

Two Colorado legislators are developing legislation to repurpose surcharges on voice landline and cell phone service to subsidize landline telephone service in high cost, less densely populated areas of the state to instead defray the cost of building out Internet infrastructure. "By funding land lines and copper-line phones, we're funding buggy whips,” Senator Gail Schwartz, D-Snowmass Village, told the Denver Post.

Rocky Mountain State lawmakers will however face resistance from incumbent telcos who want to preserve the status quo and continue to provide Internet service over their existing copper cable plants to a subset of wireline customers while deeming the rest unprofitable to serve. Throughout much of the United States, the latter cohort are in innumerable small pockets beyond the short range of DSL signals and/or where the existing copper cable is too old and deteriorated to deliver Internet service. First formed around 2000 and still around more than a decade later, they are like thousands of little holes in a big Swiss cheese, comprised of discrete premises, roads, streets and neighborhoods. Rather than “unserved areas,” they are more accurately described as redlined addresses and neighborhoods, typically avoided by both telcos and cable companies. The unfortunate residents are forced to rely on obsolete dialup offered by telcos or satellite Internet more properly suited to remote areas of the planet while the more fortunate may have access to fixed terrestrial wireless service from a local provider.

Incumbent telcos insist rules for government subsidy programs direct funds only to “unserved areas.” But building new wireline premises infrastructure is a costly, large scale endeavor that can make filling in these numerous voids one at a time impractical even with subsidies. In California, for example, incumbent telcos have largely shunned subsidies for premises Internet infrastructure offered through a six-year-old subsidy fund, the California Advanced Services Fund (CASF), similar to that being contemplated for Colorado. They have also challenged proposed CASF wireline projects by arguing the projects would serve premises adequately served by mobile broadband services.

Only a large scale overbuild of the outmoded copper cable plant with fiber to the premise infrastructure makes sense over the long term from both a technological and economic standpoint. State and federal Internet infrastructure subsidy funds should be structured accordingly.

Motorola CEO, FCC agree: Wireline is for premises Internet connectivity, wireless for mobile access

With telco wireless providers rolling out 4G service, some have raised hopes that it has the bandwidth to rival facilities-based customer premises wireline infrastructure to deliver the full spectrum of Internet service.

Motorola CEO Sanjay Jha dismisses that notion as unrealistic. Wireline will continue to be the optimum method of providing Internet connectivity and high bandwidth video content for “a long time to come,” Jha was quoted as saying this week by The Wall Street Journal.

Jha added that wireless spectrum in the U.S. remains “very limited,” and wireless providers will continue to be the primary supplier of Internet access to consumers outside their home.

Jha's perspective on the respective roles of wireline and wireless is shared by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission. In a May 20, 2011 report to Congress on the availability of advanced telecommunications capability as mandated by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the Commission rejected arguments by some mobile wireless providers claiming they can provide sufficient bandwidth to substitute for wireline service.

AT&T exec suggests wireless will save its residential market segment

AT&T may be the nation's largest telecommunications company. But its size hasn't helped it meet the challenge of upgrading its cable plant to transport Internet protocol-based services. AT&T provided wireline Internet connectivity first through dial up and ISDN connections in the early 1990s, and then DSL as the 1990s turned into the 2000s. Starting in 2006, AT&T brought fiber closer to customer premises -- but not to them -- with its FTTN (Fiber to the Node) U-Verse service utilizing VDSL. Some new, dense greenfield developments received U-Verse service via direct fiber to the premises connections.

New home construction cratered shortly after U-Verse rolled out, leaving only more challenging FTTN brownfield opportunities. They are more challenging because the old cooper cable plant designed for POTS (Plain Old Telephone Service) is used to carry high compressed VDSL signals that quickly degrade with distance, limiting the size of the potential U-Verse customer base.

Faced with these challenges to reach customer premises and seeing strong growth on the wireless side of its business, AT&T not surprisingly sees its future in the wireless space. "The future is wireless broadband and we must keep that in front of us at all times," Tim Ray, executive director for AT&T External Affairs in Northern California, said at a recent roundtable discussion hosted by Sacramento-based Valley Vision.

In 2010, Valley Vision formed the Connected Capital Area Broadband Consortium (CCABC), a coalition "which seeks to identify and coordinate strategic broadband investments in the six-county Sacramento region aimed at improving broadband infrastructure, access and adoption." Ray, who sits on Valley Vision's board of directors, appeared to suggest wireless Internet connectivity will be able to substitute for wireline connectivity, noting "27 percent of homes no longer have wire line and this trend will continue to grow."

Ray's wrong and engaged in wishful thinking. There's currently nothing indicating wireless Internet service -- which is aimed at mobile devices with a low bandwidth allocation per customer  -- can provide sufficient capacity to handle burgeoning bandwidth consumption and be able to reliably deliver to customer premises high definition video content and applications like video conferencing and telemedicine. Indeed, AT&T's wireless infrastructure is already choked with far lower bandwidth traffic from devices such as the iPhone.

AT&T is in conflict with its own business model. It's in the telecommunications business which by its nature requires lots of CAPEX and OPEX. But it expects to get a full ROI within 5 years on its CAPEX. That's not going happen in most places except perhaps in new dense greenfield developments, which as previously mentioned also aren't happening.

California PUC approves subsidy for fixed WISP build offering 14Mbs symmetric service

The California Public Utilities Commission announced July 9 that it approved a 40 percent subsidy totaling $2.8 million from its California Advanced Services Fund for fixed terrestrial wireless infrastructure to provide broadband connectivity to more than 14,000 unserved premises in Alpine, Amador, Calaveras, Tuolumne, and Mariposa counties.

According to the CPUC resolution approving the project, it will be built over a 20-month period by Mother Lode Broadband and will leverage a regional network of existing mobile cellular towers reinforced with "expanded backhaul" -- most likely fiber.

The proposed throughput will blow existing WISPs -- both mobile 3G cellular as well as fixed premises providers -- clean out of the water. It's on a business class scale providing symmetric connectivity of "up to" 14 Mbs. There's no word on latency and Mother Lode Broadband is mum on what protocol -- WiMAX is a likely possibility -- that it plans to use. In addition, the CPUC resolution is silent on the technology that will make service this scale possible, only revealing it will employ "high capacity licensed spectrum."

Only time will tell if this is for real or simply more wireless vaporware. With the deployment planned over 20 months, there is a relatively large amount of that -- and probably too much for those 14,000 premises that needed broadband 10 years ago and are still stuck on dialup or sucking a satellite. "I'll believe the speeds when I see them," one skeptical Northern California industry insider tells me.

BPL gets another lease on life

The obituary for Broadband Over Power Lines (BPL) had all but been written when IBM announced it would pony up $9.6 million in a venture with a small company to deploy BPL via electric power cooperatives formed decades ago in areas of the U.S. skipped by private power companies. Today, these same areas are being passed over by the private telco/cable duopoly and left without broadband Internet access.

According to Yahoo! Tech, the BPL rollout will take about two years and potentially serve 340,000 homes in Alabama, Indiana, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin where about 86 percent lack cable or DSL access. The project has received $70 million in low-interest loans from the Department of Agriculture.

Making this project work could prove challenging. BPL utilizes similar transmission technology as DSL that rapidly degrades over distance, requiring extensive and costly amplification to get the signal to homes over long distances.

In addition, by the time this BPL project comes on line, residents of these areas could have superior alternatives such as fixed terrestrial wireless broadband based on multiple current and emerging technologies such as WiMAX and white spaces broadband over unused television frequencies that was given the green light by the Federal Communications Commission last week. And given that these areas have a history of forming cooperatively owned utilities, they may similarly opt to form cooperatives to build fiber optic infrastructure to assure their telecommunications needs are met over the longer term.

Taking America's heartland by storm: WISPs swoop into areas neglected by wireline providers

Telecompetitor reports several WISPs are sweeping into several U.S. markets where wireline broadband service isn't offered. Not surprisingly, they are quickly signing up customers who have been waiting in vain for years for telcos and cable companies to provide high speed Internet:

All of these companies are targeting “underserved” rural markets with a broadband alternative. Underserved generally is a code word for markets served by large RBOCs and/or MSOs who have not invested in local broadband networks. These markets are often identified as a part of the “digital divide.” DigitalBridge says they have reached 10% penetration within 6 months of one their first market entries, Rexburg, ID. These growing rural deployments are leveraging quickly evolving broadband wireless technology and pent up demand for broadband in markets where little or no broadband competition exists.

According to Telecompetitor, one of the WISPs, Oklahoma City-based Stelera Wireless, has rolled out service in Floresville & Poth, Texas using recently auctioned advanced wireless service (AWS) spectrum offering maximum speeds of 7.2 Mbps down and 2 Mbps up. However, Stelera informs me that its users get average download speeds of 1.5-2 Mbps down and 350-380 Kbps for uploads.

Notably, the WISP does not use telco circuits for backhaul connections, instead relying on its proprietary OC-3 and OC-12 microwave network. In Stelera's Texas markets, service is backhauled to San Antonio via microwave and from there via long haul ethernet to Stelera's Oklahoma City HQ POP.

AT&T offers fixed terrestrial wireless broadband

AT&T is now offering fixed terrestrial wireless "broadband" connections where it doesn't provide wireline-based Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) service in addition to reselling WildBlue's satellite Internet service.

According to a customer service representative I spoke with today, the service offers speeds of 400-700 Kbs down and 250-300 Kbs up for $59.95 per month plus a $99 installation charge which includes a computer adapter card interface. Not quite broadband in this blogger's definition of 1.5 Mbs and higher, but certainly better than dial up. Ma Bell is offering a 30 day trial period for new customers, who can cancel if the service doesn't live up to their expectations.

This development comes as AT&T increases its fixed terrestrial broadband presence, deploying WiMAX-based offerings in Alaska and in the former BellSouth territory it acquired earlier this year, as well as spending $2.5 billion to acquire additional wireless radio spectrum, according to this AP dispatch today.

AT&T's foray into fixed terrestrial wireless isn't likely to offer Ma Bell a competitive edge over Wireless Internet Service Providers (WISPs) who are moving to fill the many broadband black holes in locales like El Dorado County, California. Wireless broadband offerings by El Dorado County WISPs Remotely Located and Sierra Advantage offer a greater range of choices -- including significantly higher connection speeds -- that equal and exceed AT&T's fixed terrestrial wireless offering based on speed and price. The only way AT&T can hope to compete with these emerging WISPs is to battle them on the ground by upgrading its wireline infrastructure to allow it to reliably offer higher speed connections for comparatively lower prices. So far, there's no indication it's willing to make the necessary investment, leaving the market wide open for the WISPs.

AT&T signals end of wireline copper-cable based system outside of urban areas

AT&T appears to be moving toward a wireless future outside of urban centers where the telco is upgrading its wireline plant and deploying its hybrid fiber/copper Project Lightspeed/U-Verse equipment. AT&T is currently test deploying fixed terrestrial WiMAX broadband in parts of Alaska and 22 other regions in the lower 48 states, apparently as an alternative to making upgrades to its wireline copper cable plant or replacing the copper with fiber in order to provide broadband-based services.

This week, an AT&T executive disclosed Ma Bell plans to ultimately shut down its existing voice network and replace it with a VOIP (Voice Over Internet Protocol) system in metro areas where U-Verse is being deployed.

Those not in these areas might have to wait a long time to get U-Verse VOIP service, Ralph de la Vega, AT&T's group president, regional telecommunications and entertainment, told Investor's Business Daily. Taken in combination with AT&T's move into fixed terrestrial wireless in less densely populated parts of its service area where U-Verse isn't present, it's unlikely they'll ever be offered wireline-based VOIP. All broadband-based services will likely be delivered via fixed terrestrial wireless as the aging copper cable plant and central offices built for the era of analog, plain old telephone service (POTS) are dismantled.

WISPs endeavor to provide needed broadband "third pipe" in El Dorado County

The pathetic state of wireline broadband Internet access in El Dorado County, California has spawned locally based Wireless Internet Service Providers (WISPs) to provide a much needed "third pipe" for county residents and small businesses who have been stiff armed for years by AT&T and Comcast.

Startup Remotely Located run by Jason and Jennifer Wilson is deploying Wi-Fi based service using both directional and non-directional transmission technology. Remotely Located is serving areas deprived of wireline broadband service in the Mosquito/Swansboro Country area and has recently expanded into West Camino and your blogger's neighborhood.

Sierra Advantage emerged out of the bankruptcy earlier this year of one of El Dorado County's first ISPs, Direct Connect. According to the WISP's service area map, it covers my area. Not quite yet, according to Brett Patterson, director of sales for Shingle Springs-based Sierra Advantage. "We continue to build out our network and get closer each week to offering you service," Patterson wrote in an email yesterday. "Soon we will have additional equipment up in your area. There are some very exciting, positive changes coming for us regarding our Internet services."

My hat's off to these WISPs. Providing fixed terrestrial wireless Internet access in El Dorado County's rugged terrain where steep canyons and tall trees create obstacles for wireless signals is no easy feat.

Aside from overcoming these technological hurdles and providing reliable service at advertised throughput speeds, a key challenge as they add customers will be obtaining sufficient backhaul connections to the Internet -- wireline circuits capable of providing large amounts of bandwidth -- to accomodate the growth. Subscribers won't be pleased if a bandwidth traffic jam at the backhaul makes their speeds slow to a crawl and drag with the high latency that afflicts substandard satellite-based Internet access.

Readers who subscribe to services offered by these WISPS are invited to share their experiences and satisfaction with them by posting comments to this post.

AT&T rolls out WiMAX in Alaska -- could it be harbinger of broad-based fixed wireless expansion?

As part of its "commitment to broadband innovation," AT&T announced today it is deploying fixed terrestrial wireless broadband service in Alaska this year, starting in the Juneau area. Throughout the U.S, AT&T says it has deployed 22 fixed terrestrial wireless trials and "limited deployments" in U.S. communities to date, of which eight ended up as "active commercial deployments." According to AT&T's news release:

The new service uses WiMAX wireless technology, which enables delivery of broadband services to homes and small businesses with speeds that are similar to landline technologies such as DSL. With a range of up to several miles from a central tower, WiMAX technology is emerging as an alternative broadband solution for a range of locations where deployment of landline-based technologies is impractical or impossible.

Initial deployments of WiMAX technology in Alaska will be used to provide portable wireless broadband for home and business-based access, enabling users to plug in to the service at multiple home or work locations within the service's range. As mobile WiMAX technology advances, the company will evaluate options to enable additional roaming and mobility service options for customers.

While comparing throughput speeds to DSL, AT&T did not provide actual numbers. The company appears to be pricing the wireless service similarly to DSL, stating in the news release that monthly rates start at $19.95.

This announcement out of Alaska could have implications for the lower 48 states. While apparently the company is still working out the bugs, it appears probable AT&T could ramp up its fixed terrestrial wireless broadband in order to give it another alternative to offer broadband to residential customers. AT&T clearly needs another delivery option to bring broadband to residential and home office customers outside of the limited urban areas where it's deploying its new hybrid fiber and copper U-Verse broadband IPTV (Internet Protocol TV) infrastructure.

Weak DSL signals degrade once they travel more than 14,000 feet from an AT&T central office and the company has reportedly stopped installing additional remote terminals to boost DSL beyond the 14,000 foot limit. That means those who don't already get AT&T's DSL aren't likely to be offered it in the future.

Beyond the 14,000 foot DSL limit, I suspect AT&T is finding there's not as much demand as it would like for its repackaged satellite Internet service, WildBlue. That's hardly surprising given customers are locked into a one year contract for slow throughput, high latency, steep upfront costs and a poor overall value compared to other broadband technologies.