Free Newsletter
White space debate won't be resolved with field testing
If you thought the debate over white space spectrum was going to be settled through the field tests the FCC is conducting, think again. As field testing wraps up, we once again don't know who to believe--the companies who submitted prototypes and declared them a success or the opponents who said the prototypes failed in the field.
The FCC is conducting the tests to see whether the devices that access unused television airwaves, called "white spaces," will interfere with television broadcasts. Companies such as Google and Microsoft want to use this spectrum to develop new mobile communications devices. However, the initiative has raised the ire of the National Association of Broadcasters, which argues that "white space" devices may interfere with existing television broadcasts, as well as users of wireless microphones.
Last week, Steve Sharkey, Motorola's senior director, regulatory and spectrum policy, told FierceWireless that the FCC has just finished most of the outdoor white space device testing and that Motorola's white space device, which used geolocation technology, did very well in the tests. Philips has said the same thing, indicating that its devices correctly identified occupied and unoccupied channels via sensing technology, although not necessarily the same ones each time, according to TVTechnology.com.
All of the tests have been open to the public, and apparently open to interpretation. Verizon Communications Executive Vice President Tom Tauke told Broadcasting & Cable that so far nobody's devices have passed the FCC's white space testing requirements. Verizon has been outspoken in its objection to letting companies use white space spectrum for wireless devices. Tauke says that the company favors licensed spectrum.
Shure, a leading manufacturer of microphones, says the FCC's tests of white-space prototypes at FedEx field prior to Saturday's game between the Redskins and the Buffalo Bills conclusively showed that spectrum-sensing white-space devices "will cause harmful interference to wireless microphones during live events," said Mark Brunner, Shure's senior director of public and industry relations. "Simply stated, the prototype devices were unable to consistently identify operating wireless microphones or distinguish occupied from unoccupied TV channels. More troubling, the devices failed to detect the presence of wireless microphones when switched on--an occurrence that takes place multiple times during any NFL game."
Brunner added that there is no reason to believe that further technology enhancements such as beacons would help solve the interference problem. "These tests reveal fundamental deficiencies of sensing devices--issues that cannot be pushed off with a promise to resolve these problems at some later time during certification testing," he said.
When the FCC concludes the outdoors testing, the agency will prepare a report and make overall recommendations on the use of white-space devices. And whatever side the report favors, you can bet this issue will be far from being resolved given not only the strong opposition but also the commission's strong desire to see white space devices usher in more broadband competition. --Lynnette
More stories about Verizon Wireless Google white space National Association Of Broadcasters Fedex Field Shure
Comments
Posted by Ken | August 11, 2008 - 9:49am
First, be wary of using the phrase "unused airwaves" as they are not vacant...tens of thousands of churches, theaters, sports broadcasters, TV and radio reporters, musical acts and others use the spectrum for wireless microphones. If these devices are allowed into the spectrum all of those wireless microphones will be rendered useless.
If Google and others want spectrum they should have outbid Verizon and others when previous spectrum was put up for auction. There is no reason companies like Google, Microsoft, and others should be able to build businesses on free spectrum when other companies have paid big-bucks to build them.
Posted by Anonymous | August 12, 2008 - 6:29pm
This whitespace debate seems to be searching for the best and least disruptive way to move from old technologies to new. The natural trend of Moore’s law enables faster and more capable products at lower costs, and that eans using smarter radios to detect protocols, avoid interference, and transmit with less power when devices are closer, thus lessening interference, improving security and extending battery life. It also means using smart MIMO antennas for beam shaping and self-forming & self-healing topologies. Since Bluetooth already uses its adaptive frequency hopping protocol to effectively avoid collisions with Wi-Fi, I see no reason why other new technologies can’t avoid interfering with older ones until they are eventually replaced.
Posted by wirelesss_policy_observer | August 21, 2008 - 12:46pm
I am not sure that just adding new 'better' technology is the way to go. There is a fundamental issue of 'fairness' that must be considered. Unlicensed access is an equalizer. It affords inexpensive access to the Internet for those who cannot afford expensive broadband connections.
Big corporation push for new technologies as a way to make money. These technologies may perform well because they are superior, but often they are more aggressive than existing user technology. Wi-Fi pushed out Bluetooth, and the new Wi-Fi technology (802.11n) is pushing out older Wi-Fi technology. Those who own the older devices must go out and buy new ones in order to get a chance to use the spectrum. Is that consistent with the notion of 'fairness'?
I am all for the efficient utilization of the RF spectrum, but fairness to existing users is an important requirement the FCC must impose. That necessitates more than just a vague description of fairness criteria. Rigorously testable engineering criteria must be articulated by the FCC before new uses are allowed onto the spectrum.
Posted by Whitespaceman | April 9, 2009 - 11:01pm
The 150MHz to 700MHz spectrum is ideal for wireless Internet because of its speed, range and penetration that the signals within it can achieve. The potential opportunity for public access to this spectrum is immense and should probably not be hindered by the same primitive methods of transmission that we have been using for last 70 years. Maybe it's time for the Broadcast companies and others to politely move there big spectrum butts onto the Internet and leave the space to the public. There shouldn't be any technological hurdles in the way of creating devices that can transmit over TCP/IP . Its time the public demanded the FCC do what's best for them and not what's best for the Broadcasters.
Click here to get the FierceWireless email newsletter for FREE!
Comments (5) | Post a comment