Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : The *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ftth who wrote (21222)	5/3/2007 10:18:58 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Respond to of 46821

Perhaps it's been the world's best kept secret, and if that's the case, then maybe Peter is helping to unlock it for us. Or maybe Peter is simply looking at worst case conditions and not taking into account planned enhancements that could help grease the skids (although I doubt that Peter is unaware of, or wouldn't take the time mention, those). In any event, it does seem highly incongruous, bordering on the bizarre, even, to consider that mobility would, in the end, be deemed unachievable for the reasons he cites, given the amount of 'futures' hype surrounding mobility that's come out of the WiMAX camp during the past couple of years. I've not read the paper posted by ftth, yet, nor have I really done any in-depth analysis on the matter in general, yet. I'm merely airing my inner thoughts based on a preponderance of industry claims that I and everyone else has been exposed to up until now. I really need to get a lot smarter with respect to some of these nuances before I can offer anything that could be considered (by myself, if no one else) substantive. Unfortunately, for a couple of trees, I guess I'll resume where I left off over the weekend and will be focusing on doing just that.

To: ftth who wrote (21222)	5/3/2007 12:08:23 PM
From: Peter Ecclesine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 46821

Hi ftth, US FCC Part 90 Personal Communications Services allow nomadic operation (FRS/GMRS, etc) without frequency coordination, but impose the obligation to work together to resolve interference. Part 90 Subpart y is US 4.9 GHz Public Safety, and Subpart z is US 3650 MHz Contention Based Protocol (which 802.16h is working to standardize). US Part 101 Fixed Communications requires frequency coordination in most bands or path coordination in the 70/80/90 GHz band. In the 70/80 GHz bands, 71-76 GHz is paired with 81-86 GHz operation. TDD is not allowed. At a building or location, the first registered device has the choice to transmit in the 70 GHz band (East) or the 80 GHz band (West), and all subsequent transmitters at that location must use that band as coordinated with a path coordinator. This was called East West frequency planning in WCA. The objective of this rule is to prevent an operator from installing transmitters in both bands and claim that any additional operators would cause interference. My point is the WiMAX paper does not cover any aspects of regulation that foster broader use of spectrum, just more of the exclusively licensed, frequency coordinated, Part 101 microwave use. petere