FCC Chairman: iPhone bandwidth will require spectrum changes

[AppleInsider]

Bandwidth-heavy mobile devices like Apple's iPhone will require new policies because of a coming "spectrum gap," the U.S. Federal Communications Commission chairman said in a new interview.

In a discussion with Business Week, Julius Genachowski said all signs point to there being not enough spectrum available for wireless services in the future. As a result, the FCC will have to explore alternative methods to accommodate devices like the iPhone.

"We've been spending time on long-term spectrum policy because the data suggest we face a spectrum gap," he said. "The demands that are being created by the iPhone and other mobile broadband technologies threaten to outstrip the amount of spectrum available for commercial mobile, and it's important for the country that we get long-term planning right because it takes time to identify spectrum and put it on the market. We're looking at potential innovations in spectrum policy, such as secondary licensing for spectrum, and other, more creative ideas for unlicensed spectrum."

Genachowski is a strong proponent of Net neutrality and mobile devices like the iPhone. In the past, he has specifically cited the iPhone as a "path-breaking" device that has "enabled millions of us to carry the Internet in our pockets and purses."

Under Genachowski's direction, the FCC voted unanimously on Oct. 22 to pursue his proposed six principles of freedom for Net neutrality. They are:

Freedom to access legal content
Freedom to use applications of the users' choice
Freedom to attach personal devices to connections in users' homes
Freedom to obtain service plan information
Non-discrimination: Broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications
Transparency: Providers must be transparent about network management practices

The FCC chairman also told BusinessWeek that he is an avid iPhone user. During his interview, he charged his handset and discussed his favorite app, an astronomy application called Star Walk. Genachowski said he has used it to teach his 5-year-old daughter.

Under Genachowski's watch, the FCC has taken an active role in the wireless market. Under pressure from the government, AT&T agreed to allow Voice over IP calls via its 3G network. It also inquired over the non-acceptance of the Google Voice application in the App Store.

The FCC has also signaled that it wants to increase wireless carrier competition, and increase the availability of exclusive smartphones like the iPhone in rural markets where providers like AT&T do not offer service.

Earlier this month, AT&T and a group of U.S. lawmakers asked the FCC to investigate Google Voice for blocking calls to rural areas. The telephony service currently has the ability to block calls to rural areas where it is more expensive to connect. Federal law prohibits traditional U.S. carriers, like AT&T, from blocking such calls.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[Quadra 610]

No kidding! The iPhone changed the whole game - including the carrier game.

[jukes]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

Under Genachowski's direction, the FCC voted unanimously on Oct. 22 to pursue his proposed six principles of freedom for Net neutrality. They are:

Freedom to access legal content
Freedom to use applications of the users' choice
Freedom to attach personal devices to connections in users' homes
Freedom to obtain service plan information
Non-discrimination: Broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications
Transparency: Providers must be transparent about network management practices

It's nice to see this set out here. Lots of people seem to equate Net Neutrality with unlimited usage at a particular bandwidth, which is just wrong and always frustrating to read. In particular people seem to think that Net Neutrality is going to save their iPhone unlimited data plans, which it won't.

[Banalltv]

I would prefer to see less bandwidth rather than more, I can't believe it's safe to surround ourselves with ever-increasing amounts of radiation like this.

I'd rather see people access heavy stuff like movies etc by wire ( not even home wi-fi ) and synch to their mobile devices than fill the air with it.

[digitalclips]

What about those frequencies left from TV's move to HD?

[extremeskater]

Originally Posted by Quadra 610

No kidding! The iPhone changed the whole game - including the carrier game.

The article is a bit slanted towards the iPhone. This is what was really said.

http://www.twice.com/article/357112-...ectrum_Gap.php

"We are fast entering a world where mass-market mobile devices consume thousands of megabytes each month," he said in a speech to attendees. "So we must ask: What happens when every mobile user has an iPhone, a Palm Pre, a Blackberry Tour or whatever the next device is? What happens when we quadruple the number of subscribers with mobile broadband on their laptops or netbooks?"

[extremeskater]

Originally Posted by digitalclips

What about those frequencies left from TV's move to HD?

THe 700mhz spectrum was sold in block for a total bid of 19.5 billion. Clearly ATT, Verizon and Google were bidders. I'm not sure if its been annouced who aquired which blocks. The amount of 19.5 billion was close to twice as much as the FCC expected.

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by extremeskater

THe 700mhz spectrum was sold in block for a total bid of 19.5 billion. Clearly ATT, Verizon and Google were bidders. I'm not sure if its been annouced who aquired which blocks. The amount of 19.5 billion was close to twice as much as the FCC expected.

Thanks, I missed that. I half expected Apple to bid to to be honest! I guess they don't want to get into that business. I hope it was ATT that got it, just being selfish

[mitchelljd]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

Under Genachowski's direction, the FCC voted unanimously on Oct. 22 to pursue his proposed six principles of freedom for Net neutrality. They are:

Freedom to access legal content
Freedom to use applications of the users' choice
Freedom to attach personal devices to connections in users' homes
Freedom to obtain service plan information
Non-discrimination: Broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications
Transparency: Providers must be transparent about network management practices

the freedom to access legal content is key, as the internet becomes used even more, it is important to NOT allow people to fileshare illegal content like kiddie porn and yes... pirated content like music, movies and tv.

In France, it is becoming law that people who are proven to be illegally filesharing, get sent letters and basically it is 3x your out. there is not any "right" to broadband in France. now, broadband ends up being revoked by those who steal and share illegally.

that said. this type of rational is finally coming to the USA. at least on the Govt side. I wonder when the "education" period will kick in for internet users and actual policy gets made to curb this type of behavior.

[ivan.rnn01]

AT&T's job. Not done.

[hill60]

It looks like AT&T will be losing exclusivity to smaller regional carriers, tough luck Verizon, you're stuck with your non-multitasking (Simultaneous Voice and Data) droid.

I hope that FCC guy understands that the Blackberry he mentioned uses BIS and BES to reduce bandwidth consumed by 80-90%

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by digitalclips

What about those frequencies left from TV's move to HD?

Yeah, I can't believe there is not at least mention of this. That's what the whole move was supposed to be about.
(I'll have to check out the article)

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by digitalclips

Thanks, I missed that. I half expected Apple to bid to to be honest! I guess they don't want to get into that business. I hope it was ATT that got it, just being selfish

As far as I recall, it was ATT that took the lion's share (I think).

[DaveGee]

After much consideration I have come to a very important realization that you must all be warned of immediately! tho, I fear I'm too late to change our destiny. My revelation is this, Julius Genachowski the chairman of the FCC **IS** the the devil incarnate! That's right the Devil himself has taken human form and is walking amongst us mere mortals.

This is the end of days my friends you heard it hear first...

Why?

Simple, I have NEVER been a fan of ANYTHING government run, sure I have some favorite presidents over the years but even my MOST favorites are still considered to me as nothing more than a necessary evil. Senators, no use for the lot of em, Congressmen leaches one and all, Supreme court judges?!!? DON'T EVEN GET ME STARTED!

So what does this have to do with the price of tea in China you ask...

This Julius Genachowski, aka Beelzebub, aka Lucifer, aka the Prince of Darkness, must be what I say he is because no MAN OF THE EARTH could ever make look upon a government run agency in a truly positive light... NOBODY!

Ipso facto, Julius Genachowski is Satan and watch out because the end is near!

Sorry but I've gotta run now, I need to find a back woods compound (with a fiber connection to the net) where I can hold up and make a final stand.

God help us all... we're gonna need it!

[Chris_CA]

Originally Posted by mitchelljd

In France, it is becoming law that people who are proven to be illegally filesharing, get sent letters and basically it is 3x your out.

Let me get this straight?
You are proven to have broken the law and you get a letter sent to you?
And after you are proven to have broken the law three times and had three letters sent to you, your broadband connectivity is revoked?

A letter? And three times at that?

What kind of inhumane and soulless government does France have?
This will absolutely end up in the European Court of Human Rights!

[ivan.rnn01]

Originally Posted by Chris_CA

Let me get this straight?
You are proven to have broken the law and you get a letter sent to you?
And after you are proven to have broken the law three times and had three letters sent to you, your broadband connectivity is revoked?
A letter? And three times at that?
What kind of inhumane and soulless government does France have?
This will absolutely end up in the European Court of Human Rights!

Frankly, it would be pretty nice, if I understood at least one single phrase he wrote in connection with France. No luck so far. Does he care in French??

[dasanman69]

Originally Posted by isaidso

As far as I recall, it was ATT that took the lion's share (I think).

Do your homework. Verizon won a big portion of it.

[Dorotea]

Originally Posted by DaveGee

Ipso facto, Julius Genachowski is Satin and watch out because the end is near!

Ok... who is Silk then. And what is the color. And hems do come down. Don't worry they can be sewed up.

[masternav]

Originally Posted by extremeskater

The article is a bit slanted towards the iPhone. This is what was really said.

http://www.twice.com/article/357112-...ectrum_Gap.php

"We are fast entering a world where mass-market mobile devices consume thousands of megabytes each month," he said in a speech to attendees. "So we must ask: What happens when every mobile user has an iPhone, a Palm Pre, a Blackberry Tour or whatever the next device is? What happens when we quadruple the number of subscribers with mobile broadband on their laptops or netbooks?"

Actually extreme you cite his quote in his address to the CTIA forum, not the Businessweek interview referenced by the article.

[anonymouse]

Originally Posted by masternav

Actually extreme you cite his quote in his address to the CTIA forum, not the Businessweek interview referenced by the article.

Extreme is not one to let little details like that get in the way of the point he wants to make.

[extremeskater]

Originally Posted by digitalclips

Thanks, I missed that. I half expected Apple to bid to to be honest! I guess they don't want to get into that business. I hope it was ATT that got it, just being selfish

After doing some reading from what I can tell it was estimated that ATT share would be about 2.3-2.8 billion. Their network can use all the help it can get.

[extremeskater]

Originally Posted by dasanman69

Do your homework. Verizon won a big portion of it.

I believe Verizon got Block D which was the largest block.

[extremeskater]

Originally Posted by anonymouse

Extreme is not one to let little details like that get in the way of the point he wants to make.

The reason I picked another article was to show this is not iPhone related but related to future demand. A statement was made that this problem was related to the success of the iPhone with isn't an accurate statement. The shortage isn't related to any one phone or any one network.

[extremeskater]

Originally Posted by anonymouse

Extreme is not one to let little details like that get in the way of the point he wants to make.

Hey I found your home video on the net. Are you the guy on the right?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIjBqFMwM08

[anonymouse]

Originally Posted by extremeskater

Hey I found your home video on the net. Are you the guy on the right?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIjBqFMwM08

I don't know. Is that the video with your wife on the left?

[DominoXML]

Originally Posted by Banalltv

I would prefer to see less bandwidth rather than more, I can't believe it's safe to surround ourselves with ever-increasing amounts of radiation like this.

I'd rather see people access heavy stuff like movies etc by wire ( not even home wi-fi ) and synch to their mobile devices than fill the air with it.

+1

Physics in university is long time ago, but I think I can predict that the carriers will not be able to keep the promise that the mobile internet can replace the traditional network in the next couple of years. That's what You might think you'll get when you miss the fine print of your contract only counting on the advertisement.

New services like cloud computing, media streaming, VOIP, tethering etc. will increase the traffic faster than they can expand their networks and spoil their mixed calculation.

Their possible sanctions against this trend are blocking of those services, throttling, cutting bandwidth or charging more for consuming bandwidth.

It's all about punishing.

I think a reward for sensible use of bandwidth (monthly paid refund) might be a more appealing way for most of us compared to a "all you can eat buffet" with a 200 pond bouncer looking at every bite You do when You are really hungry and preventing You from choosing what You like.

Sensible use of mobile bandwidth is environmental protection.

[extremeskater]

Originally Posted by anonymouse

I don't know. Is that the video with your wife on the left?

Hmmmm. Thats a guy on the left. You are starting to concern me you cant tell the difference. See what happens when you spend too much time in the dark with the Mac.

[anonymouse]

Originally Posted by extremeskater

Hmmmm. Thats a guy on the left.

Guess that wasn't my home video then. Maybe you posted a link to yours by mistake.

[extremeskater]

Originally Posted by anonymouse

Guess that wasn't my home video then. Maybe you posted a link to yours by mistake.

Oh well I was hoping you could do better then that comeback.

[anonymouse]

Originally Posted by extremeskater

Oh well I was hoping you could do better then that comeback.

I was hoping you'd seek help for your inferiority complex.

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by extremeskater

The article is a bit slanted towards the iPhone. This is what was really said.

http://www.twice.com/article/357112-...ectrum_Gap.php

"We are fast entering a world where mass-market mobile devices consume thousands of megabytes each month," he said in a speech to attendees. "So we must ask: What happens when every mobile user has an iPhone, a Palm Pre, a Blackberry Tour or whatever the next device is? What happens when we quadruple the number of subscribers with mobile broadband on their laptops or netbooks?"

Originally Posted by extremeskater

THe 700mhz spectrum was sold in block for a total bid of 19.5 billion. Clearly ATT, Verizon and Google were bidders. I'm not sure if its been annouced who aquired which blocks. The amount of 19.5 billion was close to twice as much as the FCC expected.

Good info. Thanks.

[Swift]

Originally Posted by extremeskater

The article is a bit slanted towards the iPhone. This is what was really said.

http://www.twice.com/article/357112-...ectrum_Gap.php

"We are fast entering a world where mass-market mobile devices consume thousands of megabytes each month," he said in a speech to attendees. "So we must ask: What happens when every mobile user has an iPhone, a Palm Pre, a Blackberry Tour or whatever the next device is? What happens when we quadruple the number of subscribers with mobile broadband on their laptops or netbooks?"

Well, duh. This is called "AppleInsider," after all. And, like it or not, it's the iPhone that really got the wave going in the smartphone business.

[xwiredtva]

Originally Posted by Banalltv

I would prefer to see less bandwidth rather than more, I can't believe it's safe to surround ourselves with ever-increasing amounts of radiation like this.

I'd rather see people access heavy stuff like movies etc by wire ( not even home wi-fi ) and synch to their mobile devices than fill the air with it.

You should be more worried about ELF's not these high frequency's. ELF's can move weather and cause upper atmosphere distortions and even remove part of the atmosphere itself.

These frequency's I think are almost harmless and if you ever turned on a radio and heard static... That's not just static that's the universe around us talking on the same frequency your tuned into. So whether it's from a nearby radio tower or the big bang (or whatever else is causing it, not looking it up and I don't know for sure but it is from Outer Space - insert theme music here) you'll still be getting hit with something.

[NormM]

Originally Posted by Banalltv

I would prefer to see less bandwidth rather than more, I can't believe it's safe to surround ourselves with ever-increasing amounts of radiation like this.

I'd rather see people access heavy stuff like movies etc by wire ( not even home wi-fi ) and synch to their mobile devices than fill the air with it.

There are many legitimate things to be afraid of in the modern world, but cell phone radiation isn't one of them. The wavelengths are too long and the power too low to break chemical bonds in your cells. Exposing yourself to sunlight is *much* more dangerous.

As Bob Park, a physicist at U Maryland put it, "The threshold energy of the photoelectric effect, for which Einstein won the [Nobel] prize, lies at the extreme blue end of the visible spectrum in the near ultraviolet. The same near-ultraviolet rays can also cause skin cancer. Red light is too weak to cause cancer. Cell-phone radiation is 10,000 times weaker."

There are always anecdotes about, for example, how vaccinations don't work because someone died after taking one, and how global warming is disproved because it's cooler on this date than it was a year ago. This isn't how science works. People are extremely good at fooling themselves, and so science has had to learn and develop elaborate techniques to defend against this. If we just depended on intuition and anecdote we'd never get anywhere.

According to careful experiment, there is no effect here. According to well tested theory, there should be no effect here.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by dasanman69

Do your homework. Verizon won a big portion of it.

No! I'm too lazy. You do it for me, (pretty please?)

[jfanning]

Originally Posted by Swift

Well, duh. This is called "AppleInsider," after all. And, like it or not, it's the iPhone that really got the wave going in the smartphone business.

No it wasn't

[anonymouse]

Originally Posted by jfanning

No it wasn't

Yeesh, if you are going to contradict someone, at least provide a basic counterargument.

[Banalltv]

Originally Posted by NormM

There are many legitimate things to be afraid of in the modern world, but cell phone radiation isn't one of them. The wavelengths are too long and the power too low to break chemical bonds in your cells. Exposing yourself to sunlight is *much* more dangerous.

As Bob Park, a physicist at U Maryland put it, "The threshold energy of the photoelectric effect, for which Einstein won the [Nobel] prize, lies at the extreme blue end of the visible spectrum in the near ultraviolet. The same near-ultraviolet rays can also cause skin cancer. Red light is too weak to cause cancer. Cell-phone radiation is 10,000 times weaker."

There are always anecdotes about, for example, how vaccinations don't work because someone died after taking one, and how global warming is disproved because it's cooler on this date than it was a year ago. This isn't how science works. People are extremely good at fooling themselves, and so science has had to learn and develop elaborate techniques to defend against this. If we just depended on intuition and anecdote we'd never get anywhere.

According to careful experiment, there is no effect here. According to well tested theory, there should be no effect here.

Thanks for that, it's pretty interesting but I ain't convinced yet.

I remember too much over the years about siting of tv and radio masts and emissions tests of mobile phone towers placed next to schools etc etc. I just don't buy it.

Here's an article which caught my eye on saturday:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/he...phone-use.html

Now granted, he does use the words 'no conclusive proof' : "The long-awaited publication of the Interphone final results paper, which will include a public health message, is likely to force a revision of advice even if there is no conclusive proof that mobile phones cause brain cancer."

but further down he also says: "Most studies including ours show we do see something happening in what we call long-term users."

I ain't convinced yet, but thanks a mil.

[jfanning]

Originally Posted by anonymouse

Yeesh, if you are going to contradict someone, at least provide a basic counterargument.

ok, the smartphone market was well established prior to the existance of the iPhone. Maybe it kicked things off in the US, but not in the rest of the world

[solipsism]

Originally Posted by jfanning

ok, the smartphone market was well established prior to the existance of the iPhone. Maybe it kicked things off in the US, but not in the rest of the world

He didn’t say it wasn’t well established. He stated that “it's the iPhone that really got the wave going in the smartphone business.” That is true. It was the stagnant, carrier controlled market that even allowed Apple to compete with a smartphone. Nokia’s CEO has admitted as much.