02/19: FCC Vote on Broadband Future

[Freakapotimus]

FCC vote to set broadband's future

By Declan McCullagh
CNET News.com
February 19, 2003, 4:00 AM PT

WASHINGTON -- The Federal Communications Commission is set to vote Thursday on proposals that could lay new ground rules for telecommunications companies selling high-speed Internet access.

At one level, the vote represents a high-stakes power struggle at the FCC's 12th Street headquarters between lobbyists for companies like Verizon Communications and SBC Communications that own local telephone networks and a host of rivals like AT&T and WorldCom that want to connect to them.

But the FCC's painstaking internal deliberations also highlight an ideological conflict between two wildly different views of how to keep broadband prices low and competition robust: Should federal regulations be strengthened or rescinded? The FCC's answer will determine not only the winners and losers in the broadband race, but also how much consumers will pay for high-speed access and how technologies such as online movies and video telephony will be implemented.

Read the full story at http://msn.com.com/2100-1104-984733.html

[JMHX]

Welcome to Indiana, battleground of SBC. Our televisions are washed in propaganda from both sides of the battleground, yet I've chosen to side with SBC. I don't have much reasoning, as from the research I've done, both companies will basically be vying for monopoly power. Just...SBC. I have better fights to wage.

[Sweden-Forever]

broadband kicks ass

[implodinggoat]

My hope is that 802.11b technology will eventually become widespread and cheap enough that 56K connections will be a thing of the past but in the mean time I can't live without my DSL.

[MarijuanaClock]

I only paid $26(American) for cable, and shaw is pretty much the only cable company here.

And adsl is $19.50(American), and again Telus, the phone company here, pretty much has a monopoly.

[Spike-J-Wolfwood]

What the hell!?!?!?!?? I pay fucking $50 a month. God damn SBC!!!!!!!

[MarijuanaClock]

At 2/19/03 10:32 PM, Spike_J_Wolfwood wrote: What the hell!?!?!?!?? I pay fucking $50 a month. God damn SBC!!!!!!!

and I lived in a rural area, so cable was really really fast ^_^

[Spike-J-Wolfwood]

............. damn you......

[Raptorman]

At 2/19/03 08:44 PM, implodinggoat wrote: My hope is that 802.11b technology will eventually become widespread and cheap enough that 56K connections will be a thing of the past but in the mean time I can't live without my DSL.

802.11B technology has got somme serious limitations that will never allow it to be a replacement for traditional wired access points. Foremost is power, the 802.11b standard runs at a maximum of about 280 mW severly limiting range. Cranking up the power is simply not an option as it could cause units to step on their neighbors. Another limitation is bandwidth. There are 11 channels available in the US and each one can run a maximum of 11Mbits/sec. This is a design number which you will never come close to in the real world. Also, it runs at the same frequency as the bluetooth system. (2.4 GHz) Close proximity of the two severly reduces performance of both of them.

I would like to see more commercial development in the 802.11a area. It runs higher data rates and on the 5 GHz frequency, it dosn't conflict with bluetooth.