19 August 2007

FCC Sets Spectrum Auction

From PC World:

The long-awaited auction of 700MHz 'beachfront property' is scheduled to begin in January.

Stephen Lawson, IDG News Service

Saturday, August 18, 2007 3:00 PM PDT


The U.S. Federal Communications Commission will begin its long-awaited auction of 700MHz radio spectrum on Jan. 16, 2008, the agency said Friday.

The sale is expected to take in US$10 billion or more in bids for what has been called "beachfront property:" licenses for frequencies that can carry mobile data and voice services over long distances and through walls much better than current cellular spectrum. The frequencies are currently used by analog television stations, which are scheduled to turn their channels over in 2009 as they move to digital broadcasting.

Google Inc. and others asked for rules in the auction that would help new entrants get into the national wireless business, such as a requirement that the winner sell some of the spectrum wholesale to other service providers. The FCC finally watered-down rules for openness, including that one part of the band can be used by any device or application.

The agency is seeking public comments on the auction, designated Auction 73. They are due by Aug. 31.
Choice is good.

Until the next post.

Steve

Eric Schmidt talking about Web 2.0 vs 3.0

From Youtube dot com.

When Eric speaks a lot of people listen.




Until the next post,

Steve

Stephen Dukker, CEO NComputing, comments on OLPC

NComputing has for more than a year been one of the top three searches that bring users to this site. I personally operate their units at two sites with out a problem.

From: Stephen Dukker, NComputing CNET News.com

Published: 07 Aug 2007 17:59 BST

via news.zdnet.co.uk

The last few years have witnessed an increasing focus on creating inexpensive, affordable computers for users in the developing world.

At the forefront of this movement is Professor Nicholas Negroponte, founder and former director of the MIT Media Lab. His not-for-profit One Laptop per Child (OLPC) project has been developing a laptop (targeted at $100 (£50) but currently struggling to break $200) suitable for use by every child in the developing world. Recently, Intel joined the board of OLPC and will even contribute funding to the project.

Helping people in the developing world cross the digital divide is a fundamental act of decency and generosity — and even self-interest — as these new markets grow, consumers spend and productivity surges. The need for technology among the under-served is so urgent, hopeful thinking goes, that even a computer with no commercial viability — no distribution channels, maintenance, training, programming services and, in fact, virtually no IT ecosystem at all — can meet that market's need.

As laudable as this dream is, the ideal unfortunately runs counter to a fundamental fact of life: a computer cannot exist independent of basic economic realities.

A computer is, rather, a creature of connectivity and collaboration. And, given the economic realities in the developing world, $200 computers cannot generate the profit essential for the creation of a robust IT ecosystem, which is essential to ensure successful deployment, ongoing operation and maintenance.

The price of a base-level personal computer today is about $400. That hasn't changed much in the last 10 years, although the power this computer delivers has increased profoundly. As a result, however, the world computer user base has been stuck at a largely saturated 850 million users for years. Unfortunately another billion potential users — most in developing and under-served markets like education — cannot afford the requisite $400. If we can merely squeeze down the price tag, have we solved their problem?

Only if you believe that OLPC and Intel's $200 laptop, with their PDA-like, seven-inch screens and obsolete processors are the answer. But the developing world is not just "village kids", but rather motivated, ambitious people engaged in business, agriculture, commerce, healthcare, finance and education.

As laudable as this dream is, the ideal unfortunately runs counter to a fundamental fact of life: a computer cannot exist independent of basic economic realities

Stephen Dukker, NComputing

For PCs to be productive in this business and educational landscape, they require a host of supporting services, plus reasonable features and capabilities. A PC must communicate, which mandates connectivity. That, in turn, demands configuration, maintenance, professional services, technical support, hardware and software upgradeability. Without a healthy ecosystem, a PC is not worth even $200.

Here in the developed world, the PC hardware makers have put up with profitless computing for years as a result of operating in a saturated, upgrade-driven market. We know our industry is in sick condition and we have now driven down the cost of "real PCs" as far as they can go.

However, not everyone needs their own PC. What they do need is access to the functionality and benefits that the PC provides, delivered in an affordable and efficient way. That's where I believe multi-user computing fills the void.

This multi-user model is not new. During the 1960s, when computers were all mainframes and cost millions, multi-user computing, in the form of time-sharing (where we rented access by the hour using low-cost "dumb terminals"), was our first tool for expanding the market from the "Fortunate 500" to the rest of us. This model continued through the 1970s, with $100,000 and, ultimately, $10,000 minicomputers further expanding the market. In the 1980s came the PC and the world changed; ultimately, we all got our own computers.

Although the last 10 years have seen very little movement in the price of low-end PCs, technology advances have turned the 2007 entry-level PC into a very muscular piece of technology whose gigapower is more than 1,000 times that of a $400 box built in 1998. Only a fraction of today's PC users, such as computational scientists, extreme gamers, graphic artists and industrial designers use more than a few percent of what these mainframes on a desk can offer.

As a result, the vast majority of those CPU cycles are wasted, burning energy (150 to 200 watts per box) which is costly and scarce in these markets and becoming ever more costly to own. So why not harness and share this extra capacity and resurrect these proven techniques and technologies from the past to take today's "mainframe on a desk" and put its power to work?

Enterprise computer users have been benefiting from the PC version of multi-user computing since 1990, something our industry has dubbed "server-based computing". Blade computing and virtualisation are the latest twists on this same multi-user concept.

However, these enterprise software and hardware components are expensive. The software licences alone often add up to more than the cost of the full or stripped-down PCs being used as the access terminals. These terminals (thin clients) are themselves as expensive as low-end PCs. It has been, thus far, a technology for the rich and fortunate.

A number of new firms, including my own company, NComputing, have reincarnated the thin client with non-CPU-based access terminals. Access terminals are being built today at costs as low as $11 and sold for well under $100 per user. At the same time, they provide manufacturers, distributors, resellers and maintenance partners with full commercial margins. The expensive software and high-end servers have been replaced by low-cost or free software and desktop PCs. These multi-user environments tap the power of low-end PCs to support 10 or more concurrent users, with power consumption of under six watts per user.

All the evidence undercuts the widespread technology assumption about how best to liberate emerging regions of the globe from the energy-wasteful business model which is being foisted upon them today.

Stephen Dukker is chief executive of NComputing. He is also a founder and former chief executive of eMachines.

If your are really interested, perform a search on "NComputing Ndiyo Teradici". Leave me a comment and i will forward you the name of a computer manufacture that is also interested.

Until the next post,

Steve

Clearwire and Sprint partner to build out WiMax in US

Cleaning out the email box and came upon this article. T1 speed with wireless. Covers about 300 million users in the US. I like it.

From: Stephen Lawson, IDG News Service

Sunday, July 22, 2007 4:00 PM PDT

With wider national coverage than either company could have had on its own, Sprint Nextel Corp. and Clearwire Corp. say they can achieve on their joint WiMax network some of what Google Inc. and others want to see in the prized 700MHz band.


The companies announced Thursday they will link their respective WiMax wireless broadband networks to give subscribers a seamless roaming experience across territories that eventually will cover 300 million U.S. residents. The network will deliver between 2M bps (bits per second) and 4M bps downstream and about half that speed upstream, they said.

Sprint and Clearwire plan to use WiMax so that subscribers can choose among a wide range of devices built to the open standard on which the technology is based. In addition, they intend to let users access any application or service on the Internet, said Atish Gude, senior vice president of mobile broadband operations at Sprint.

The upcoming auction of 700MHz radio spectrum around the U.S. has sparked a fierce debate between traditional carriers and Google Inc., Frontline Wireless LLC and others over how that spectrum should be used. Current mobile operators generally sell a limited set of devices locked to their networks and favor their own applications among the offerings their customers can access on their phones. Google told the FCC on Friday it won't bid unless the government requires any-device, any-application networks. It also wants a rule forcing the winners to sell wholesale network access to other service providers. Sprint doesn't have plans for wholesale access.

Sprint, which announced its WiMax plans last year, said Thursday it owns spectrum licenses for the WiMax band that cover 185 million U.S. residents. Clearwire has spectrum in the same band to serve 115 million people. The combined network should be fairly comprehensive, covering urban, suburban and rural areas across the country, which today has a population just over 302 million, the Census Bureau estimates.

After "soft" launches in Chicago and Washington, D.C., at the end of this year and commercial availability starting next year, the companies together aim to reach 100 million people by the end of 2008. This is the same 2008 goal Sprint had given previously by itself, but it was an aggressive goal then and is now a conservative estimate, Gude said. The companies did not estimate when the full network would be completed.

Given the higher frequency Sprint and Clearwire plan to use, at 2.5GHz, their network is likely to need more base stations than a similar network using 700MHz, which travels over long distances and through walls more easily.


Video about Xohm

Clearwire already operates a wireless broadband service and has been planning to convert it to standard mobile WiMax, which is only now emerging as a commercial technology. The company is backed by heavy hitters including Intel Corp. and Motorola Inc.

Sprint, struggling against larger rivals AT&T Inc. and Verizon Wireless Inc., could use Clearwire's helping hand. The deal may let Sprint realize its WiMax dream at less expense, said IDC analyst Godfrey Chua. There seems to be little overlap between the two carriers' licenses, so the partnership won't really hurt competition and is likely to win government approval, Chua said.

The first users will access the network with standalone modems, notebook add-on cards or PCs and smaller Ultra Mobile PCs with embedded modems, Sprint said. But it sees mobility as the key driver of the network and believes WiMax handsets will arrive by 2009, Gude said.

However, Chua thinks ever-faster cellular technologies have the edge for mobility. The Sprint-Clearwire network will compete mainly against DSL (digital subscriber line) and cable modem services, with the advantage that subscribers can set up a notebook away from home and enjoy the same service. It could significantly boost broadband competition, he said.

"It's making the world a little bit more interesting now," Chua said.
Until the next post,

Steve