Home » Wireless Broadband » Recent Articles:

NY Gets Broadband Mapping Grant: $6.3 Million Is a Lot of Scratch for a Map

New York State has won $6.3 million in federal stimulus grant money to draw a map of broadband availability in the state.  That’s a lot of money to draw a map.

Hopefully it will deliver a better result than the map that’s already online: inaccurate, slow to load, incomplete, and doesn’t play well with some browsers.

The NY State Office of Cyber Security is responsible for administering the project, which is an improvement over provider-infested (Well)-Connected Nation that draws maps for some other states.  The one developed for Texas was so bad, it became fodder in an election campaign to ridicule the man who approved it.

Theoretically, people can enter a street address and see a list of broadband providers who offer service in their neighborhoods, including the types of service and advertised service speeds.  But most of the data is voluntarily provided by the service providers themselves, and we know they have no reason to exaggerate, right?

Here at Stop the Cap! HQ, we decided to give the map a test run to see what it claimed was available here in the town of Brighton, a suburb just southeast of the city of Rochester, N.Y.:

NY State Broadband Availability Map for Zip Code 14618 - Brighton, N.Y. (click to enlarge)

Just to assist readers, the orange color represents fiber access, the blue represents cable broadband, and the pink-salmon represents DSL.  The results are actually an overlay of various service providers.  Time Warner Cable service is available throughout the 14618 zip code and the pockets of fiber are targeting business parks and medical offices.  These results appear generally accurate.  What is missing is an accurate depiction of DSL service.  That may be because Frontier Communications, the local telephone company, is not listed as a participant in the mapping project.  While DSL performs dreadfully in a number of areas in this zip code, it is generally available for most residents.

The results for wireless providers were a real hoot (speed results are for downstream and upstream speeds, respectively):

AT&T Mobility Mobile 1.5 mbps – 3 mbps 768 kbps – 1.5 mbps
Leap Wireless International Mobile 768 kbps – 1.5 mbps 768 kbps – 1.5 mbps
Sprint Nextel Mobile 768 kbps – 1.5 mbps 200 kbps -768 kbps
Verizon Wireless Mobile not reported not reported

(Note to AT&T: In your dreams.)

Only one of these results represent actual speeds seen from wireless broadband providers in this neighborhood, and we’ve tested most of them.  Sprint Nextel can manage 768kbps connections on its 3G network, and even faster speeds on its 4G network.  AT&T’s claimed 1.5-3Mbps is laughable.  Leap Wireless (a/k/a Cricket) delivers an average of 500-600kbps, with occasional bursts of 700kbps in this area.  Verizon typically has the best coverage but there is no data to compare.

The mapping folks have a lot of work to do to map actual wireless speeds around the state, not simply take the word of providers about the speeds they deliver.  New Yorkers can take a speed test and presumably help create that database.  The link is available at the top right of this story.

Ostensibly the map will allow the state to identify areas where high-speed Internet access is lacking so those gaps in coverage can be addressed. Gov. David Paterson has made a priority of extending affordable high-speed Internet access to all New Yorkers.  How a state with a budget deficit that approached $9.2 billion this summer can map its way towards that may require another grant.

Thanks to Stop the Cap! reader Paul for letting us know.

Verizon to Apple: We Won’t Jump Through Hoops for Your iPhone

Phillip Dampier September 29, 2010 Competition, Consumer News, Verizon, Wireless Broadband 1 Comment

Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg has sent the strongest hints yet that Verizon’s interest in going the extra mile to acquire the Apple iPhone is waning, and the company is increasingly unlikely to make major concessions to carry it.

Seidenberg’s comments came during last week’s Goldman Sachs Communacopia Conference.

Verizon’s position as America’s leading wireless carrier does not appear to be threatened by AT&T’s exclusive American agreement with Apple.  While AT&T customers desperate for an alternative carrier may be fueling “wishful thinking”-rumors that Verizon is about the obtain the rights to sell the phone, there is no evidence any deal with Apple is imminent.

In fact, Seidenberg’s remarks were clearly interpreted by Wall Street that Verizon won’t jump through Apple’s hoops to win an agreement, especially as Android-based phones are nipping at the iPhone’s heels:

“We have worked hard at building a franchise out of Droid, which proves that if there is an acceptable alternative to the iPhone, and a great network, and a great distribution channel, the market will go there for it. We don’t feel like we have an iPhone deficit. We would love to carry it when we get there, but we have to earn it. We have to show all the suppliers that we have equal treatment, and we have a network for people to put all of their equipment on.  […]Hopefully, at some point Apple will get with the program.”

Apple’s reputation and market power are also on the line, and many analysts think the company’s terms and exclusive agreements are now doing more harm than good.  Earlier this month, Bernstein Research analysts Pierre Ferragu and Toni Sacconaghi concluded Apple must make the iPhone available to all carriers if it wants to compete with Android.

Google has tripled its growth to 200,000 activations per day in just seven months, and with Android being the dominant smartphone technology on major carriers like Verizon, O2 (UK), Vodafone (Germany), China Mobile and NTTDoCoMo (Japan), Android’s total installed base is expected to overtake the Apple iPhone within 15 months.

Apple’s reputation has also suffered from a year of missteps, ranging from the loss of a beta iPhone, “AntennaGate,” occasional outbursts from CEO Steve Jobs, and growing revelations of a new firmware issue that is dramatically stunting battery life on many iPhone and iPod units.

Verizon Wireless Joins the Internet Overcharging Party: Will Limit Wireless Usage in “4-6 Months”

Phillip Dampier September 24, 2010 Competition, Data Caps, Verizon, Wireless Broadband 4 Comments

Fashionably late, Verizon Wireless intends to change its wireless smartphone data plans to end unlimited usage in the next four to six months, according to Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg.

Seidenberg said Verizon Wireless’s new data plans, which he says will probably arrive in time for the holiday shopping season, will differ from AT&T’s but he refused to elaborate.

“We’re not sure we agree yet with how they valued the data,” he said at an investor conference Thursday.

The change has been widely anticipated in the wireless industry, as Verizon Wireless and AT&T, the nation’s largest and second largest carriers, charge nearly identical pricing for their wireless services.  Both carriers formerly charged smartphone customers $29.99 per month for unlimited wireless usage.  AT&T eliminated unlimited usage with two new plans unveiled in June with the introduction of the latest Apple iPhone.  One charges customers $15 a month for up to 200Mb of usage, and another charges $25 for up to 2GB of usage per month.  Customers exceeding the limits pay $15 for an additional 200Mb or $10 per gigabyte in additional fees.

Critics charge Verizon’s decision to slap usage limits and overlimit fees on customers is just another attempt to gouge wireless customers, made possible by the two providers’ market power.

Wall Street Journal reader Candace Kalish commented on the new limited usage attitude Verizon seeks to embrace:

What the carriers want is a tiered system with outrageous penalties for slight overages. The banks, car renters, airlines, and credit card issuers do very well with this. It is the most profitable business model since it requires careful underuse or disproportionate costs on the part of their customers. This is why they require people to guess their usage and impose punitive marginal costs on single byte transfers.

[…]I think the carriers’ actions indicate a much greater concern with short term profits rather than long term innovation and even great profitability.

[…]Since carriers impose rates on a take it or leave it basis, I don’t see rates improving much in the near future. I’ll stick with my ancient $30 a month plan and a cheap flip phone with an iPod Touch. When competition kicks in, possibly in the next 10 to 20 years, and they offer more for my money, I’ll consider a smarter phone. Right now the market is still what they used to call a natural monopoly, and the pricing structure proves it.

Seidenberg

Seidenberg made it clear the new Internet Overcharging schemes will arrive in time for the company’s introduction of its fourth generation data network – Long-Term Evolution, more commonly known as LTE.  Earlier, Verizon hinted to its investors it intends to market its LTE service at a premium price, anticipating customers will be willing to pay a higher price for faster service.  This, despite the fact LTE will deliver Verizon dramatically increased capacity at a lower overall cost, in terms of bang for the spectrum buck.

Company officials are still considering whether LTE pricing will carry a per megabyte charge with little or no usage allowance or a more common usage allowance plan with overlimit fees.  Either way, few expect wireless will offer an effective competing alternative to wired broadband service, unless one’s monthly usage is below 5GB.  Above that amount, overlimit fees could quickly accumulate, leaving customers with wireless bill shock.

Dave Burstein, publisher of DSL Prime, commented back in January about wireless data pricing:

Charging at the this level, if the other wireless carriers go along, is a blatant attempt to protect their other services. [A government agency] filing points out the likely reason: “The Commission also must keep in mind that the two largest US wireless providers, Verizon and AT&T, also offer wireline services in major portions of the country, raising the question of whether these providers will market these services as replacements for wireline services.”

If his prices carry the day, the […] broadband plan will accomplish very little. The [plan] implicitly counts on wireless for competition, because new wired networks are highly unlikely and their plan doesn’t change that. Wireless voice in the U.S. is a weak cartel, data a relatively strong cartel. [Verizon’s] signals may inspire the other carriers to also drastically cut the basic data allowance.  Or not.

If there’s a significant cut in the 5GB wireless allowance, then the broadband plan needs a huge redirection to measures that work [in] a telco-cable duopoly. That’s so tough I don’t know if Washington can do that.

Thanks to our regular reader Bones for sending word.

NY City Broadband Advocates Unimpressed With “Free Wi-Fi” Deal in Parks

Phillip Dampier September 23, 2010 Cablevision (see Altice USA), Consumer News, Data Caps, Public Policy & Gov't, Wireless Broadband Comments Off on NY City Broadband Advocates Unimpressed With “Free Wi-Fi” Deal in Parks

Big Apple Day

As part of franchise negotiations between Cablevision, Time Warner Cable, and New York City officials, an agreement was reached to spend $10 million to provide “free Wi-Fi” service in some 32 parks across the metropolitan area.

But “free” access comes to those who can accomplish their wireless usage in ten-minutes, because that’s all the “free” use the two cable giants will allow non-customers on their wireless networks.  Specifically, non-cable customers can access the new Wi-Fi at no charge for up to three 10-minute sessions per month.  If you want more than 30 minutes a month of access, it will cost you $0.99 a day.

Broadband advocates in New York accused the Bloomberg Administration of selling out public spaces to private companies during the city’s closed-door negotiations with the two cable operators.

The NY Daily News:

“There should be totally free wireless in the parks,” said City Councilwoman Gale Brewer (D-Manhattan). As head of the Council’s Technology in Government Committee, Brewer has made the fight for free WiFi one of her signature issues.

“This sounds like a joke,” she said when told of the deal. “I don’t understand how this works logistically. How will they track people’s use and charge everyone?”

“It’s pure bait-and-switch,” said Dana Spiegel, head of NYCwireless, a nonprofit group that has helped set up free WiFi at Bryant, Madison Square and a half-dozen other public parks.

“The way people use WiFi in public spaces is not to hop on and hop off after a few minutes,” Spiegel said. “Real people use it for a half hour or hours at a time, and that means the cable companies will end up charging them.”

The NY Post:

“We think it’s a pretty good deal,” said Mitchel Ahlbaum, general counsel at the [city’s] Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications (DoITT).

He said the cable companies had wanted to charge “a substantial amount,” but eventually agreed to the minimal fee, which they insisted on so they could offer free access to their subscribers.

The thought of non-cable subscribers subsidizing free, unlimited access for Time Warner Cable and Cablevision’s broadband subscribers infuriated Spiegel:

As a tax-paying resident of NYC, I’m personally offended that DoITT would allow a CableCo to make money off of our tax-funded parks. TWC had revenue of $17.9 billion in 2009, and they are paying part of $10 million to light up NYC parks. That’s less than 0.05% of their revenue. Meanwhile, they stand to make $10’s of millions of dollars per year providing this service. (Central Park gets about 25m visitors per year, and if we ignore all other parks, and figure that fewer than half of those visitors buy one day of internet service, we get $0.99 x 10 million visitors = $10m.)

This seems to be DoITT selling out NYC residents and tax-payers. And we shouldn’t be surprised considering how DoITT and the NYC government have been in the telco’s/cableco’s back pocket for years.

A few more notes:

  1. If its not 24/7 Free, its not Free Wi-Fi. Period. This is clearly not “Free Wi-Fi” but rather government sanctioned subscription Wi-Fi.
  2. That DoITT released this on primary day was a clear attempt to bury this news because it knew it was doing wrong by residents of NYC.
  3. The previous Park Wi-Fi program with WiFiSalon drove that company out of business. See our post: Wi-Fi Salon Shuts Down
  4. What happened to DoITT’s plan to offer a more open and sustainable park Wi-Fi program? They put out an RFI last year ), and we (NYCwireless) had quite a lot to say about it (see Response to City Wireless Internet Access for New York City Parks and Other Open Spaces (DoITT RFI) and Our Take: NYC RFI on “City Wireless Internet Access for New York City Parks and Other Open Spaces”). But at least they were trying to ask the right questions.
  5. And what of security and privacy issues? Isn’t this deal like the city saying that we all should be giving our personal and billing information to TWC and Cablevision? What sort of protection has the city negotiated on our behalf?

Sprint CEO Says Provider “Could” Discontinue Unlimited Pricing, But Not Now

Phillip Dampier September 22, 2010 Competition, Data Caps, Sprint, Wireless Broadband 2 Comments

Sprint CEO Dan Hesse told a crowd of Wall Street investors the wireless provider could drop unlimited wireless pricing if the costs to deliver it begin to upset shareholders.

“We are watching very closely,” Hesse said during a Goldman Sachs-sponsored conference.

“Clearly, I’m not ruling out metered [price packages],” he said. “But customers value simplicity.”

While Hesse stressed the company had no immediate plans to drop its “Simply Everything” plans, it does acknowledge a small percentage of its customers are using enough of Sprint’s network to cost the company more than it earns from its heavy users.

But Hesse argued the marketing benefits of unlimited service may have brought the number three wireless carrier more business (and revenue) than it loses.  Sprint has been trying to recapture a stronger position in the wireless market lost after years of notoriously poor customer service and reduced coverage areas.

Most customers who left Sprint switched to AT&T or Verizon Wireless.  Both of its larger competitors have been seeking to impose more usage limits on its customers, especially for data.  Sprint hopes to win some of them back, but Hesse admits the company still has a long way to go to improve customer numbers.

Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

Your Account:

Stop the Cap!