Re: Microsoft in the broadcast spectrum

[rd@cottonwood.com (Rick Dahlgren)]

  DBS can provide a good stream of data, but there is a problem of managing
  requests (upstream communications) and beyond that a national deployment
  would require quite a bit of downstream bandwidth.  Even a small broadband
  deployment runs across a 144 mbs backbone and breaks into subnet nodes in
  the individual neighborhood, so that for an individual customer with a
  10mbs cable modem, they essentially are sharing that 10mbs subnode net with
  a relatively small number of users.  The upstream request signalling could
  only be affordably managed with a bridge scheme like telephone modem or
  some other reliable way to send IP requests.  That opens up the challenge
  of some sort of local or 800 based modem intensive call center and all of
  the overhead to support that either regionally or nationally....suddenly
  you're AOL without enough modems to receive requests...with a pretty good
  way to deliver the data once the request is received......
  
  The solution may lie in the multiple low orbit satellite network Gates and
  McCaw are building......for now, satellite telephony (which is the wireless
  way requests could be made without a wireline bridge) is still
  prohibitively expensive unless you're on your 120 ft. yacht 450 miles out
  from the nearest cellular or pcs tower.
  
  Rick Dahlgren
  
  >I recall suggesting back in 1993 that DBS would be an good architecture
  >for Internet  delivery, even allowing for the asymmetry problem.  Who
  >needs that fat bandwidth going back up?  This got people upset.  But,
  >there are no major technological or legal barriers of which I am aware
  >to implementing this model, and DBS TV is now widely deployed (expect in
  >Canada -- but that is a long and sad story).  Any ideas as to why the
  >market hasn't rushed to this model?
  >
  >HPK
  >
  >*******************************************************************************
  >
  >
  >Rick Dahlgren wrote:
  >>
  >> So much for closed captioning.
  >>
  >> Just wait till over the air broadcasters start implementing using the
  >> bandwidth the FCC just gave them for high def, especially the pbs
  >> stations....there is enough bandwidth for several high speed (10 mbs or
  >> better) per existing broadcast station....what an outrageous handoff.  At
  >> which presidential coffee was that given away.
  >>
  >> The vertical blanking bandwidth is like an oxcart while the new "free tv"
  >> spectrum is like a F-16.
  >>
  >> I've been saying for months that the battle is going to be in tv like
  >> implementations...not cable modems.  Complete with bandwidth barriers to
  >> potential competitive offerings.
  >>
  >> Broadcast managers just want a box that will bring in money....maybe M-soft
  >> has the box, the ribbon, the contents and the delivery truck.
  >>
  >> How do you fix this?
  >>
  >> Rick Dahlgren
  >***************************************************
  >--
  >Howard Knopf
  >Perley-Robertson, Panet, Hill & McDougall
  >90 Sparks St.
  >Ottawa, Canada
  >Phone: 613-566-2820 or
  >       1-800-2-OTTAWA
  >
  >E-Mail: knopfh@perlaw.ca,hknopf@magmacom.com
  >WebSite: http://www.perlaw.ca