The 700mhz Spectrum Auction In Perspective 88
YIAAL writes "Writing in Popular Mechanics, Robert X. Cringely looks at the upcoming auction of the 700mbz spectrum, which is currently used for soon-to-be-defunct analog TV. 'Why are all these companies so excited? Because the 60 MHz of spectrum that's about to be auctioned is the last prime real estate for mobile communications that will be available in the U.S. for decades to come ... Some pundits (that would be me) think Google will bid to win its spectrum block, then will trade that block to Sprint/Nextel for some of that company's 2.5-GHz WiMAX licenses that are far better suited for data.' Plus, the prospect of offering unlicensed data service in the 'white space' between existing broadcast channels."
Helloooooo, McFlyyyyyyy! The coupons! (Score:4, Informative)
You're a few years too late in your complaint.
Re:Check your summary please! (Score:2, Informative)
Looks like many typos to me. Well done, Slashdot!
Re:Just a thought... UHF 60-69 for... TV? (Score:3, Informative)
Um...you just came up with a solution to a problem that isn't even there.
I'm not sure you know what the transition from Analog broadcast to Digital broadcast is all about. And you are not alone.
Nobody is required to switch over to HD. At no point has the analog to digital transition had ANYTHING to do with whether or not anyone owns an HD capable television.
It is merely to stop broadcasting broadband, innefficiant ANALOG signals in favor of narrower, more efficient DIGITAL signals SPECIFICALLY OVER THE AIR. This is still free, over-the-air, "broadcast" TV.
Digital TV does not mean HD...in fact, all standard channels will be broadcast in Digital Standard Definition with SOME choosing to simultaneously broadcast SD and HD at the same time.
Like I said, you are not alone. I have heard MANY people fighting this because they don't want to go out and buy a new TV when, in fact, TV's sold over the past 10+ years are digital capable anyways.
ANY TV with RCA plugs, or SVideo, or Component, or HDMI, or Coaxial are digital capable. If you can hook up a satellite receiver or cable box or a gaming console, you are digital capable. Now raise your hand if you don't fall into that category...then explain to me how you can't justify upgrading your 1960's era TV yet you have a computer with internet access. And if you are THAT stubborned, FINE (each to his own)...the converters are cheap...remember the RF converter you hooked your old school Nintendo to your TV's cable input with?
It's time!
You're ready!
Now let's start reaping the rewards of a more efficient system where there is MUCH more bandwidth open for more content and it takes FAR LESS power to do it in.
Level the playing field so the consumer benefits from the wider variety of content available from more sources instead of letting cable and satellite companies tell us what our options are and charging us whatever they want for them.
You will no longer have to pay satellite and cable companies extra fees for access to local channels.
Enjoy.
Re:The 700MHz Band is great for data (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Just a thought... UHF 60-69 for... TV? (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, you've got that exactly backwards. Those on the fringes who get ANY picture on analog TV stations, should expect to get a perfect ATSC signal. It has been proven in practice a great many times (a web search should turn up plenty of accounts). And more to the point, broadcast radius is, in fact, ATSC's biggest strength over DVB.
Re:The 700MHz Band is great for data (Score:5, Informative)
As someone who professionally designs cellular networks I can tell you that for data services 20MHz at 2.5GHz is much better than the same 20MHz at 700MHz. The data rate is determined not only by the channel bandwidth but also by the amount of interference that is generated by neighboring base stations. This interference depends on the RF propagation characteristics. At 2.5GHz the RF signals die off much faster with the distance than at 700MHz. As a result your interference levels will be lower at 2.5GHz. The downside is, of course, that cell coverage area of each individual base station will get smaller and you have to deploy them at substantially higher density. Rule of thumb: for voice you are coverage limited and you want your 700MHz (or 850MHz, ATT, Verizon) and big cells. For data you want small cells and high frequency band (2 or 2.5GHz).
Just my two cents from the tranches.