AT&T residential broadband on back burner?

Some observers including your blogger have questioned AT&T's commitment to the residential wire line market in the wake of the company's recent acquisition of BellSouth, giving Ma Bell a 100 percent stake in Cingular Wireless. Indeed, AT&T chief Ed Whitacre told The Wall Street Journal after the deal closed "We're about to become a company with wireless at its heart.'' That likely means investment in AT&T's wire line infrastructure has been bumped down to a lower priority.

A personal experience today reinforces that scenario. I walked by a Cingular store and noticed a sign in the window "AT&T/Yahoo High Speed Internet Sold Here." So I dropped in and asked the manager when it would be available in my neighborhood. He didn't have a clue and suggested I come back in a couple of days and talk to the "techie guy." I headed out the door before he could ask me if I was interested in a wireless phone.

Welcome to my neighborhood, a broadband black hole

The typical explanations for broadband black holes tend to fall along geographic or demographic lines. Homeowners are either located too far from existing telecommunications infrastructure or telcos and cable companies don't like their income levels, figuring they won't spring for more profitable premium and bundled broadband services.

Apparently my neighborhood is an exception to both rules and I wonder if perhaps there are others like it. It's just two miles from a major U.S. highway where both DSL and cable services are available.

The demographics are don't fit the usual rationale for digital redlining either. One nearby property owner is building two residences and a home office (and large pool complex) on his land. Just up the road, another property has just been listed for more than $1 million. Seems like the kind of demographics the nearby telco (AT&T) and cable company (Comcast) would like. Can't blame low density either. Several of my neighbors are within 100 feet of my home.

Apparently broadband black holes are like the physical black holes in space to the incumbent telco and cable providers. It's as if they don't exist and no information about them can escape.

Media think tank faults flawed U.S. telecom regulation for shortcomings in broadband access

U.S. telecommunications regulators operate without a clear overall policy goal and Americans consequently have less access to broadband services than Europeans, a media think tank concludes in a paper issued this week.

[W]hile the European Union has defined its issues focused on their definition at the highest levels of policymaking and seems to be addressing the challenge created by social inequity, Congress is mired in regulating the relationship among the operators. Instead of managing competition it manages the competitors. It perceives the issue as one that arises from the need to allow operators to provide certain services, and as a result the regulator does not deliberate the goals of the policy. Indeed the focus of policy in the United States is on the needs of the industry and not on public service.

According to the Benton Foundation:

America is on the verge of vast new broadband-driven digital transformation that promises to make life more livable, businesses more productive, jobs more plentiful, and the Internet more accessible. However, at the dawn of this digital age, those who could benefit the most from this economically empowering technology are also those most likely to be left without access because of where they live or how much money they make.

As Congress puts universal service reform at the top of its telecom policy agenda, this page will provide a one-stop collection of papers and speeches advancing a new vision for Universal Service -- for making broadband as universal as telephone service is today and a pathway for progress. This effort will embrace the premise that Universal Broadband access is now as important to the advancement of the American ideal of equal opportunity in the 21st century as universal access to education and universal phone service was in the last.

HDTV growth emerges as driver for fiber to the home

While cable companies and telcos are making a play for so-called "triple play" services combining telephone, high speed Internet and video, the rapid growth of high definition TV is likely to require them to upgrade their systems to fiber optic cable, an industry consultant suggests. That's because metal wire-based coaxial and copper cable lack the capacity to carry the estimated 20 Mbps that end users will require in order to get all three services including HDTV. Michael Kennedy explains in Telecommunications Online:

Video services consume most of the bandwidth within the voice, video, and Internet Triple Play portfolio. About 2 Mbps is required to deliver Standard Definition TV and 9 Mbps is required for High Definition TV. Whereas network designers can safely over subscribe bandwidth higher up in the network this cannot be done when allocating bandwidth to a single enterprise establishment, household or local serving area— especially for video service. HDTV sets are already out selling SDTV so HDTV must be taken as the standard offering when planning an Optical Distribution Network. This means that each household must be allocated a minimum of 20 Mbps because several HDTVs are likely to be in use at the same time.

.

Legacy analog copper, cable infrastructure stymies U.S. broadband growth

So said Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska at yesterday's Senate Commerce Committee looking into why the United States is falling behind other nations on broadband connections. And Stevens cautioned those who regard wireless broadband infrastructure as a suitable replacement:

"The problem is basically we can't use the legacy system of cable and wire" for broadband and have to build out across rural areas, Stevens said. "Wireless technology has brought new communication, but it is slower and not adaptable."

U.S. continues to lose ground on broadband connections

The United States continues to lose ground when the number of people with broadband communications connections here is compared to other countries.

U.S. broadband penetration among worldwide industrialized nations dropped from 12th to 15th place, according to broadband rankings released this week by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

In addition, the United States ranks 20th in the 30-member OECD roster in terms of growth rate of broadband penetration in the last year.

"We are failing to bring the benefits of broadband to all our citizens, and the consequences will resonate for generations," said Ben Scott, policy director of Free Press, a national lobbying group whose goals are to reform the media and universal access to communications.

A message from the dark side of the digital divide, El Dorado County, California

14 Years ago, I could only log on at 26,400kbs. Today, i Can only log on at 26,400. What is the major problem here? Somebody needs to make DSL available for those of us who do not live in town. My Son cannot even use the Net for a reports hes working on due to the load times of web pages these days with multimedia/java apps. Enough is Enough!

Remotely program my U-Verse DVR? Huh?

A lot of AT&T customers are going to respond with a collective "Huh?" when they read this announcement informing them they can now program their U-Verse DVRs remotely via AT&T's Yahoo broadband portal. Like I said, "Huh?"

First of all, only a small number of AT&T customers can get Ma Bell's IPTV (Internet Protocol TV) service. Second, large numbers of AT&T customers aren't even offered broadband services at all, left twisting in the wind on the wrong side of the digital divide.

Yet another exercise in irrelevancy by AT&T. What planet are AT&T product managers living on?

"Urgent action" needed to address Ireland broadband market failure

Australia, England now Ireland are sounding the alarm over perceived shortcomings in their respective nations' broadband telecommunications infrastructures and are considering government intervention.

State franchise bills make digital redlining public policy

If telephone and/or cable companies are pushing legislation to create a state-based broadband franchising regulatory scheme in your state, most likely there's a provision in the bill that requires them to serve only half of their customers six years after the law takes effect.

If the provision's in there, your state is about to be partitioned into two halves: one half will have access to high speed Internet and other advanced digital services while the other half won't. And despite language giving lip service to the notion that state franchising laws will speed broadband deployment, there are typically no incentives in the bills to reward telcos and cable companies to do so. Just the opposite: these bills have a built in stalling mechanism to hold off deployment to large areas over the next six years and leave the future uncertain beyond that. The franchise bills also contain another fallacy: that statewide franchises will spur competition that's good for consumers. Not true. There is no meaningful competition with a duopoly of incumbent telcos and cable providers and in many areas, a monopoly where consumers can get digital services from either the telephone or cable company, but not both.

Here's the latest example from Tennessee, where AT&T is supporting an amendment to that state's franchise legislation incorporating the 50 percent over six years build out requirement.

"Systematic redlining on a statewide scale"

Consumer groups and local governments are opposing proposed Illinois legislation backed by AT&T that would take away the authority of local governments to require broadband services be offered throughout their jurisdictions and instead put the state in charge of issuing statewide franchises.

Illinois PIRG was joined by national consumer groups including Consumers Union in opposing the bill in its original form. “The unintended consequence will be systematic redlining on a statewide scale,” according to a letter from Consumer Union’s Jeannine Kenney and others to state legislators. They say other states with similar deregulation schemes have seen prices increase, “leaving consumers with nothing but empty promises.”

FCC begins inquiry on broadband deployment

The Federal Communications Commission, apparently chastened by its poor data gathering methods to determine whether broadband services are being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion as required by Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, has undertaken an effort to get better data.

The FCC issued a notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to explore alternative methodology to replace its much criticized Zip code-based parameters that deemed broadband being offered if only one customer in the Zip code has service at a speed of least 200kbs.

The Commission is reassessing how to define broadband in light of the rapid technological changes occurring in the marketplace, including the development of higher speed services and new broadband platforms. The Commission will also focus on the availability of broadband, including in rural and other hard-to-serve areas; on whether consumers are adopting new services; and on the level of competition in the marketplace. The Commission also wants to determine what can be done to accelerate the rollout of broadband services, and seeks comment on current investment trends in the industry. The Commission also seeks comment on external data sources that shed light on broadband prices and the extent to which consumers have a choice of competing providers of broadband service in the United States, ideally on a house-by-house and business-by-business basis, as well as comparable data on speed, price, availability, and adoption in other countries.

FCC Commissioner Michael J. Copps said the proceeding is long overdue, warning the United States is falling behind the rest of the world on broadband access and cost.

We can start by facing up to our problem and doing our level best to diagnose its causes. We need to know why so many Americans do not have broadband, and why those who do (or think they do) are paying twice as much for connections one-twentieth as fast those enjoyed by customers in some other countries. This is not just an exercise in self-flagellation (though we certainly deserve that by now).

Rather, it is the first step in coming up with some solutions that can start to reverse our nation’s slide into technological and communications mediocrity.

Copps also lamented a decade wasted with poor data gathering efforts that have left gaping broadband black holes in much of the U.S. produced by "commercial and regulatory missteps."

If the Commission had prudently invested in better broadband data-gathering a decade ago, I believe we’d all be better off—not just the government, but more importantly, consumers and industry. We’d have a better handle on how to fix the problem because we’d have a better understanding of the problem. We would already have granular data, reported by carriers, on the range of broadband speeds and prices that consumers in urban, suburban, exurban, rural and tribal areas currently face. We would know which factors—like age, gender, education, race, income, disability status, and so forth—most affect consumer broadband decisions. We would understand how various markets respond to numerous variables. We could already be using our section 706 reports to inform Congress and the country of the realities of the broadband world as the basis for charting, finally, a strategy for the ubiquitous penetration of truly competitive high-speed broadband. I don’t believe we’d be 21st in the world had we gone down that road. But that was the road not taken.

Fiber is key to bridging the broadband gap

Increasingly there's consternation about a broadband gap between the U.S. and Great Britain and Southeast Asia, where connections in U.S. and U.K. tend to run 1 to 2 mbs compared to 100 mbs in Seoul and Hong Kong.

"The move to broadband in Britain has been very successful, and credit must be given to companies like BT," said Kip Meek, the chairman of BSG - the Government's advisory group on broadband and digital convergence.

He added: "But the next step is extending fibre optic or wireless connections, and that involves significant investment."

More broadband troubles from down under

I've posted about the ongoing broadband "drought" in Australia. Looks like things aren't much better next door in New Zealand. The government is reportedly considering subsidizing satellite service for about seven percent of New Zealanders who won't be able to get ADSL wire line broadband despite the government's telecom reforms apparently designed to promote wider broadband access.

There are rumours that the Government may consider subsidising the cost of satellite equipment that could be used to deliver broadband to the 7 per cent of New Zealand homes that couldn't be served using Telecom's ADSL network. It is understood some work is under way within the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, but suggestions of a major initiative are being played down.

The cost of satellite equipment has hindered take-up to date, though there are other drawbacks to the technology such as latency, which make satellite connections less suitable for delivering interactive applications such as Internet telephony.

New Internet architecture on the drawing board

While many still lack broadband connections to the existing Internet, researchers are planning a new and improved Internet architecture:

No longer constrained by slow connections and computer processors and high costs for storage, researchers say the time has come to rethink the Internet's underlying architecture, a move that could mean replacing networking equipment and rewriting software on computers to better channel future traffic over the existing pipes.

The National Science Foundation wants to build an experimental research network known as the Global Environment for Network Innovations, or GENI, and is funding several projects at universities and elsewhere through Future Internet Network Design, or FIND.

NY legislation would mandate 85% build out requirement

New York Assembly Bill 3980 would create a Broadband Development Authority to increase the availability and quality of high-speed broadband Internet to Empire State residents.

At first glance, it would appear the measure is backed by the telco/cable duopoly since it features a key component of industry sponsored broadband regulatory reforms: preemption of local government authority to regulate advanced digital services and instead putting state regulators in charge of issuing digital franchises.

But telcos and cable companies don't like the bill, which sets a higher build out requirement than the 50 percent or less over six years favored by the industry and enacted in several states such as California's Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act that took effect this year. AB 3980 would instead require that level of system build out be achieved in just three years and 85 percent in six years.

Click here and scroll down to read the report High-Speed Debate in the New York alternative weekly Metroland Online.

Two emerging alternatives to the telco/cable duopoly

AT&T and Comcast are like the big kids on the block prone to bragging and boasting about what they can or are going to do. Ma Bell boasts she's rolling out Internet Protocol TV (IPTV) including HD channels. Comcast says it's introducing digitial voice telephone service in addition to its TV programming and high speed Internet (HSI) services.

Behind the braggadocio, however, there exists a far different and less boastful reality. Fully one fifth or more of AT&T customers can't even get broadband Internet access over Ma Bell's aging copper cable system let alone IPTV. They're told to suck it up and get by with sluggish, impractical dial up connections running at 24kbs or plunk down hundreds of dollars and pay too much for too little from a satellite provider.

The story's the same for many would be Comcast customers who don't happen to reside where Comcast currently provides service. The big cable company doesn't appear to be expanding its service areas, calling into question its strategy of going head to head with the telcos for telephone service. Comcast can't compete with the telcos if it doesn't penetrate their service areas.

The situation won't change unless local governments and/or public utility districts partner with companies with expertise in installing and operating fiber optic-based infrastructure that can form the basis for open access telecommunications networks.

Without these local endeavors, the alternative is back to the future -- a 1984-style federal government ordered break up of the telco/cable duopoly, only this time in combination with a government takeover of the nation's telecommunications system on the principle that it is vital infrastructure that can't be left to the whims of monopolistic private sector providers.