Legislation has been introduced in California to speed up deployment of broadband in areas of the Golden State that lack access.
The urgency legislation, which would take effect as soon as it's signed into law by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, would update the status of several recommendations issued by Schwarzenegger's Broadband Task Force last year to expand the availability of broadband access.
Its main objective is to develop a strategy to expedite access to $7.2 billion in grants and loan guarantees contained in the recently enacted federal economic stimulus legislation, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The proposed California Broadband Task Force would also be tasked with identifying public and private community development partners, necessary statutory or regulatory changes, and needed resources to qualify for the stimulus funding.
The full text of the measure is available here.
Tuesday, March 03, 2009
Monday, March 02, 2009
Survey: Aussies don't see wireless broadband as viable fixed premises solution
While wireless broadband can provide an interim solution for fixed premises broadband, a survey of Australians shows folks down under lack confidence in its ability to deliver broadband to their homes in one of the developed world's most broadband deprived nations.
According to iTnews, the survey of 20,000 respondents, conducted between Dec. 31, 2008 and Feb. 1, 2009, found that fewer consider wireless broadband a viable alternative to wireline for fixed premises broadband than they did a year ago. Last year, 43.3 percent of respondents said they would consider wireless broadband to be a "serious option" for home Internet access. This year the number drops to 36.8 percent.
"Consumers are now more educated about the limitations of wireless broadband, whereas a few years ago they might not have actually tried it," says Whirlpool founder Simon Wright. "Also, historically wireless broadband has meant [nomadic] services like Unwired; now it means little USB dongles they buy from the likes of Telstra and Vodafone. These are marketed as a different type of product; and the limitations of 3G are generally better known."
Friday, February 27, 2009
Telcos, cablecos have future role as middle mile and long haul IP connectivity providers
Bob Frankston has penned a thoughtful piece that encourages out of the box thinking when it comes to broadband Internet connectivity. He's dead on. We're at a transition point between yesterday's legacy single purpose, proprietary telco and cableco owned systems designed to dispense discrete services as billable events and the open architecture possibilities of the Internet that allow for customization according to need.
The two models are not compatible -- which Frankston says explains the artificial market scarcity of bandwidth delivered via the telcos (slow and costly 1970s-era T-1 lines that telcos are still selling, for example) and cablecos at a time where fiber to the end user is capable of delivering hundreds of megabits and even gigabits per second.
Instead of expecting telcos and cablecos to meet our Internet protocol-based telecommunications needs, Frankston suggests we view these entities as middle mile and long haul carriers. They would still have a critical role to play, serving locally owned and operated telecommunications entities such as municipal fiber systems and fiber cooperatives. Frankston has seen the future and I share his vision.
The two models are not compatible -- which Frankston says explains the artificial market scarcity of bandwidth delivered via the telcos (slow and costly 1970s-era T-1 lines that telcos are still selling, for example) and cablecos at a time where fiber to the end user is capable of delivering hundreds of megabits and even gigabits per second.
Instead of expecting telcos and cablecos to meet our Internet protocol-based telecommunications needs, Frankston suggests we view these entities as middle mile and long haul carriers. They would still have a critical role to play, serving locally owned and operated telecommunications entities such as municipal fiber systems and fiber cooperatives. Frankston has seen the future and I share his vision.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Irony abounds in comments by U.S. representative, telco and cable reps on broadband stimulus funding
A highly interesting item appears in today's PC World. It reports on a telephone town hall conversation yesterday between a Tennessee resident and her Congressional representative, Representative Marsha Blackburn (R). It's an encounter to which many U.S. residents will readily relate.
The hapless constituent is stuck on dialup just one mile inside a broadband black hole event horizon. Repeated pleas to an unidentified broadband provider to roll out broadband service produced nothing and the constituent's patience has worn thin.
Blackburn responded by asserting the market would deliver if only more folks in the displeased constituent's neighborhood demanded broadband. Thus, Blackburn reportedly said, the $7.2 billion in subsidies and loan guarantees in the recently enacted federal economic stimulus legislation for broadband deployment to rural and other underserved areas are unnecessary since the market will solve the problem. That's patently incorrect as petitions by residents and small businesses to providers -- so called demand aggregation -- don't convince providers to deploy broadband infrastructure that their proprietary algorithms reject as economically unfeasible.
Ironically enough, Blackburn was disabused of her misapprehension that a competitive market exists in the natural monopoly -- and a duopoly at best -- that is wireline telecommunications service by representatives of two prominent members of the telco/cable duopoly at a panel discussion hosted by the Free State Foundation.
Thomas Tauke, executive vice president for policy at Verizon, pointed to market failure where the costs of providing service go beyond what providers like Verizon are willing to pay. Many of the areas without broadband are "very expensive to reach," PC World quoted Tauke as saying. Accordingly, Tauke added, broadband infrastructure subsidies such as provided in the stimulus legislation are entirely appropriate. The broadband funding in the stimulus measure also drew positive comment from Joseph Waz, senior vice president for external affairs at Comcast, who told the panel its inclusion is "very heartening."
That adds another layer of irony insofar as the big telcos and cablcos have gone on record elsewhere complaining the broadband funding provides little incentive for them to build out their infrastructures, arguing tax breaks would get infrastructure build out faster than grants or loan guarantees. They also object to the open access provisions attached to the stimulus funding.
The hapless constituent is stuck on dialup just one mile inside a broadband black hole event horizon. Repeated pleas to an unidentified broadband provider to roll out broadband service produced nothing and the constituent's patience has worn thin.
Blackburn responded by asserting the market would deliver if only more folks in the displeased constituent's neighborhood demanded broadband. Thus, Blackburn reportedly said, the $7.2 billion in subsidies and loan guarantees in the recently enacted federal economic stimulus legislation for broadband deployment to rural and other underserved areas are unnecessary since the market will solve the problem. That's patently incorrect as petitions by residents and small businesses to providers -- so called demand aggregation -- don't convince providers to deploy broadband infrastructure that their proprietary algorithms reject as economically unfeasible.
Ironically enough, Blackburn was disabused of her misapprehension that a competitive market exists in the natural monopoly -- and a duopoly at best -- that is wireline telecommunications service by representatives of two prominent members of the telco/cable duopoly at a panel discussion hosted by the Free State Foundation.
Thomas Tauke, executive vice president for policy at Verizon, pointed to market failure where the costs of providing service go beyond what providers like Verizon are willing to pay. Many of the areas without broadband are "very expensive to reach," PC World quoted Tauke as saying. Accordingly, Tauke added, broadband infrastructure subsidies such as provided in the stimulus legislation are entirely appropriate. The broadband funding in the stimulus measure also drew positive comment from Joseph Waz, senior vice president for external affairs at Comcast, who told the panel its inclusion is "very heartening."
That adds another layer of irony insofar as the big telcos and cablcos have gone on record elsewhere complaining the broadband funding provides little incentive for them to build out their infrastructures, arguing tax breaks would get infrastructure build out faster than grants or loan guarantees. They also object to the open access provisions attached to the stimulus funding.
No antitrust issue in ISP suit vs. AT&T, U.S. Supreme Court rules
Reuters reports the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled against several Internet Service Providers who brought an antitrust suit against AT&T in 2003 claiming the big telco's pricing policies on DSL service constituted uncompetitive market conduct.
The ISPs alleged AT&T and its predecessor, SBC Communications, maintained unreasonably high wholesale access charges to ISPs to deliberately thwart them from competing with SBC/AT&T for Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) customers as permitted under the line sharing provisions of the federal Telecommunications Reform Act of 1996. Ma Bell then lowballed prices on her own DSL offerings, making it impossible for the ISPs to compete on price, the ISP plaintiffs complained.
The ISPs alleged AT&T and its predecessor, SBC Communications, maintained unreasonably high wholesale access charges to ISPs to deliberately thwart them from competing with SBC/AT&T for Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) customers as permitted under the line sharing provisions of the federal Telecommunications Reform Act of 1996. Ma Bell then lowballed prices on her own DSL offerings, making it impossible for the ISPs to compete on price, the ISP plaintiffs complained.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Stimulus measure's broadband funding could spell economic opportunity
NetworkWorld published a piece today examining the potential economic impact of the $7.2 billion earmarked for grants and loan guarantees to finance the construction of broadband telecommunications infrastructure.
The article discusses how broadband access may effectively stimulate entire towns and regions by supporting businesses and jobs that might not otherwise locate there. In the larger scheme, broadband has the potential to more evenly distribute economic activity and population across the United States among major metro regions and less populated areas.
Here's an excerpt:
The article discusses how broadband access may effectively stimulate entire towns and regions by supporting businesses and jobs that might not otherwise locate there. In the larger scheme, broadband has the potential to more evenly distribute economic activity and population across the United States among major metro regions and less populated areas.
Here's an excerpt:
Asked whether the stimulus plan could mean call centers such as those in Mumbai could start showing up in central Kansas, Settles said, "It depends on how fast the stimulus works, but there is pent-up demand in the U.S. for broadband. If a company wanted to expand a business, broadband could decide if they go to rural Kansas rather than Milwaukee and would be a driver to get a company to open a business in a smaller community with less overhead. Generally, it might still be cheaper to go abroad, but broadband would help companies afford to build not just call centers but IT service operations."Opening such businesses in the U.S instead of abroad would certainly lessen "administrative hassles," he added.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)