“Some U.S. airwaves used for free, over-the-air TV signals must be repurposed for mobile broadband use to tackle a looming spectrum crisis, the top U.S. communications regulator said on Tuesday,” Jasmin Melvin reports for Reuters.
“The Federal Communications Commission wants Congress to grant it authority to hold incentive auctions that would compensate television broadcasters for giving up some of their spectrum to wireless companies,” Melvin reports. “‘I believe the single most important step that will drive our mobile economy and address consumer frustration is authorizing voluntary incentive auctions,’ FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski told broadcasters at their annual convention in Las Vegas.”
Melvin reports, “But broadcasters have been resistant to the agency’s proposal, worried about the unintended consequences that parting with airwaves could have on their TV signals and the viewers they serve… Some 25 million Americans watch video on their cell phones, and tablet computers like Apple Inc’s iPad put 120 times more demand on spectrum than older phones. ‘This growing demand is not going away. The result is a spectrum crunch,’ Genachowski said. ‘The only thing that can address the growing overall demand for mobile is increasing the overall supply of spectrum and the efficiency of its use.'”
Read more in the full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Fred Mertz” for the heads up.]
The reason for the “looming spectrum crisis” is that the cable operators are greedy bastards who put their enormous profits in their miserable pockets instead of expanding and upgrading their networks. There is no way that consumers (aka the American people) will ever win as long as high-speed communications are in the hands of the cable companies and/or mobile telephone networks. It seems that Apple is one of the only players in a position to challenge the stranglehold that these predatory companies have on the communications industry. Can Apple bust their chops for good and deliver the country from media hell? Stay tuned for the next exciting episode!
Not quite. It’s true that communications firms always look to government for handouts rather than voluntarily upgrading networks, spectrum is a different animal.
Spectrum is a limited natural resource, and as such it can’t me “made” or “upgraded,” it simply must be cut up and doled out differently.
omalansky
You are really out of your league here.
This Fcc problem is getting out of hand 95-124 and 1967, 1969, and 1978 Laws make it clear that Free Televised Over Air Broadcasting is supposedly to be kept up. Cable TV is becomming a Monopoly and Pay Tv is following . Satelite Tv i helped to become existant within mid California to offset Pricing of Cable 159.99 month for 50 channels. Satelite for 29.99 month 60 + channels and new ones added as three open air were created one was set to Satelite programing. With Open air channels you could set a pipe to side of your house with an antena on top turn it an get perfect channels even seize Cable sepage channels. Cable got mad because of such, those channels existed and were coming in fuzzy even on lower bands. Anyway before Cable started sending them to peoples homes. Greed is behind the Cable companies pulling open air access out of peoples hands. Laws were to protect you. “FCC ” was set to regulate such – Cable companies because of Lyndon B Johnson laws 1967 this way no one could get any monopoly. They are getting around it now, by saying even if you have an antenna you must pay Cable or Sattelite charges in most areas. Then you have the Cell phone companies in which i was to recieve a license for unserved areas PPP Celular ie Spectrum Resources Mcgrew industris was to build up my company our Attorney Richard Weintraub III and assoc. San Diego California. President Clinton said (Lottery) then money and licenses went out the door towards his programs .. As for my company over (million dollars in loss) Yet government and Cellular companies want more bandwidth and are talking again , Lottery except from the Over Air Television Broadcast spectrum airwaves . Who will lose ? It is the rich getting Richer at the poor and small business owners expense…..! This cost you and tax payers more money ….
““The Federal Communications Commission wants Congress to grant it authority to hold incentive auctions that would compensate television broadcasters for giving up some of their spectrum to wireless companies,” ”
Since when does the spectrum “belong” to the broadcasters? Haven’t they been using THE PUBLIC AIRWAVES for decades now without paying a cent? Shouldn’t that have been compensation enough?
But they are public airwaves.
I think it’s more like cable and satellite owners are losing customers at an incredible rate now that people are discovering that over-the-air HDTV is not only free, it’s better quality. Like Microsoft, Comcast needs to keep its customers inside the corral where it can abuse them with impunity. Taking free TV off the air raises those corral fences even higher.
I get 22 HDTV channels over the air. Cost = 0$.
Cable systems are required by carriage laws to carry local broadcasters in unscrambled basic channels.
The over-the-air signal is naturally better quality since it doesn’t have to be compressed.
And BTW, no one is taking broadcasters off the air, save for some of their poor programming choices.
This Fcc problem is getting out of hand 95-124 and 1967 1969, and 1978 Laws make it clear that Free Televised Over Air Broadcasting is supposedly to be kept up Cable TV is becomming a Monopoly and Pay Tv is following . Satelite Tv i helped to become existant within mid California to offset Pricing of Cable 159.99 month for 50 channels Satelite for 29.99 month 60 + channels and new ones added as three open air were created one was set to Satelite programing. With Open air channels you could set a pipe to side of your house with an antena on top turn it an get perfect channels even seize Cable sepage channels. Cable got mad because of such, those channels existed and were coming in fuzzy even on lower bands. Anyway before Cable started sending them to peoples homes. Greed is behind the Cable companies pulling open air access out of peoples hands. Laws were to protect you. “FCC ” set to regulate such Cable companies because of Lyndon B Johnson laws 1967 this way no one could get any monopoly. They are getting around it now by saying even if you have an antenna you must pay Cable or Sattelite charges in most areas then you have the Cell phone companies in which i was to recieve a license for unserved areas Attorney Richard Weintraub and assoc. San Diego California. President Clinton said (Lottery) money and licenses went out door towards his programs .. for my company over (million dollars in loss) yet government and Cellular companies want more bandwidth and are talking again Lottery except of over Air Television Broadcast spectrum airwaves . Who will lose ? it is the rich getting Richer at the poor and small business owners expense…..!
Who do you pay for your internet access?
Time for someone to invent STAR TREK’s subspace communication.
Yeah, but the result will probably be the same as Mel Brooks film “SpaceBalls” when the spaceship’s Self Destruct has been activated and with 10 seconds left they were made aware of the “Cancel” switch and so they went to the “cancel” switch and it was “Out of Order” causing Mel Brooks to lament…
“Even in the Future, Nothing Works!”
Great. Thus forcing people to buy cable or satellite if they want to watch TV. That’s $80/month I don’t want to spend. How about we fast forward to where Verizon and AT&T are the only cell carriers left, with both using LTE, and both are regulated to ensure customers benefit. Having four carriers is not possible with the spectrum limitations.
No. The underlying idea is for the FCC to raise more money.
Then, when it backfires because they mis-handled it, we will get another analog-to-digital debacle like they created 5, no 4, no 3 years ago.
Further evidence the television industry is now following the path of the dinosaurs. In this age of “restructuring”, many seemingly immutable corporations/organizations etc. will continue to topple quickly if they fail to keep pace with a rapidly changing/mutable playing field.
You know, the irony here is that much of this spectrum was at one point thought useful to start-ups in local markets to have more competition in ISPs.
The problem is ANY interference in a digital video stream freezes it until the correct info replaces it (this is most commonly seen as tiling when satellites have rain fade or temperature inversions in terrestrial video), so any errant transmissions that find themselves in adjacent bands will be annoying until the frequency is stable.
Now, couple this with the other broadcast problems and you can see why they are not so anxious to strip their defenses (as I see it).
Hey TowerTone, looking at your Gravatar reminds me –
You probably have seen these videos … But if not, enjoy.
http://www.flixxy.com/tower-climbing.htm
http://www.flixxy.com/burj-khalifa-dubai.htm
For anyone who is nervous of heights, strap yourself in!
Yeah, I had seen that first one.
None of my towers are near that tall (500′ max)
Ironically, the guys in the first video ride a lift most of the way whereas I have to climb the entire height of mine.
Every time something like this is offered, one must follow the money trail: who’s making money and who’s losing money. The bottom line IS that they want to take away free over-the-air TV. It’s all about greed and control. We don’t have to accept it.
Who is ‘they’, and which ones are ‘greedy’?
There are a lot of customers who believe they should get unlimited internet service at huge download rates for next to nothing (even if the govt. had to subsidize).
Are these the greedy you speak of?
And BTW (part 2) no one is claiming to take away over-the-air broadcast.
No one.
Is Genachowski attempting to raise re-election donations?
Well, “some” means what exactly?
“…Some U.S. airwaves used for free, over-the-air TV signals must be repurposed for mobile broadband use to tackle a looming spectrum crisis…”
The U.S. airwaves used for free, over-the-air signals? That’s what I’m reading. It’s not about getting something for nothing. It’s about being aware of the powers in place that are only motivated by greed and control. Enough said.
The entire range of frequencies are not used in each market.
Not only that, but there is some small room between the channels that can be used, IF IT DOESN’T INTERFERE WITH THEIR BROADCAST SIGNAL.
I have no clue what your greed angle is.
Gaah I hate the fcc!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
but it would be sooo cool if apple took it and made a long range wireless networking protocol with it
it’d be like a mix between wifi and cellular networks