Airborne Internet Nears in Canada

Canada's licenseholder for air-to-ground in-flight Internet has set mid-2011 launch date: The service was supposed to be ready in late 2010, but SkySurf Canada Communications is now targeting mid-2011. Because of Canadian spectrum rules, US provider Aircell, which operates its Gogo Inflight Internet service on over 1,000 aircraft while they pass over the continental US and Alaska, couldn't bid on Canadian service. Instead, it's partnered with SkySurf.

JetBlue Sets Mid-2012 for In-Flight Internet

Boingo and T-Mobile Expand Roaming Deal

T-Mobile customers get substantially improved airport access, plus ferries: A new agreement between Boingo Wireless and T-Mobile gives T-Mobile's subscribers a lot more access in transit. T-Mobile adds 53 Boingo Wireless airport locations; Boingo is the largest North American Wi-Fi airport operator.

T-Mobile users can now also surf on the Washington State Ferry system at no additional cost. For the tens of thousands of daily ferry commuters--WSF handles over 50 percent of the country's daily ferry trips--T-Mobile just became a lot more attractive.

Boingo gets a little bit in exchange: its subscribers can use T-Mobile's airline club lounge and hotel locations. T-Mobile–operated airports were previously included in roaming.

T-Mobile’s Throttled Limit Didn’t Change from 5 GB

Verizon's Handoff Delays Show Signs of Early Release

Carrier-grade operations are supposed to be carrier grade: In its enthusiasm to have LTE operating in multiple markets before year's end, Verizon Wireless let a few gears slip. That's unfortunate, because now they've set the expectation that the service isn't ready for prime time as a result. Reports of performance have been quite excellent on an unloaded network.

The problem? Computerworld reports that a handoff from 3G to LTE can take up to two minutes. A spokesperson told the reporter, "Hand-offs can take up to a couple minutes, but that was expected and a fix is in the works."

If it simply were an inherent problem, that's one thing. But it's clear this can be fixed in software, and is considered a bug. That makes it far less acceptable. In the olden days, products weren't shipped broadly until bugs that would frustrate your early adopting, high-paying customers were worked out. Bragging rights were more important here.

LTE Is About Capacity, Coverage, and Latency, Not Just Bandwidth

Numbers Guy Digs into Wi-Fi Kills Tree Reports

Carl Bialik, the Wall Street Journal's Numbers Guy columnist, talks to the sources behind the incendiary Wi-Fi radiation kills trees reports: Thank you, Carl, for finding the sources, and revealing how nuts some of the information is. I was troubled that a single report could ricochet around the world with no real statistically valid or peer-reviewed published information behind it. But it's even worse than that.

Niek van 't Wout, the green space chief in the Dutch city of Alphen aan den Rijn, checked out a small number of the town's trees, found "abnormalities" in 70 percent, and van 't Wout extrapolated this with no additional research to all of Europe. There appear to have been no lab tests or pathology, or an attempt to determine the cause, nor to survey more broadly even in the city. Bialik dug up a published email by van 't Wout in which he speculated in 2007 that electromagnetic fields were responsible before having a single shred of evidence.

The study of trees in a controlled environment was also commissioned by the city and independent of the tree survey. The testing regime hasn't been released (under what conditions were plants and trees kept), nor does there appear to have been any controls—trees and plants in the same environment with shielding to block EMF. The exposed vegetative material had six Wi-Fi access points running nearby, which is not the proximity of exposure nearly any trees would receive. As with all EMF, signal strength decrease with the inverse square of the distance from the transmitter with a standard omnidirectional antenna; the formula is a bit different for a directional antenna, but then there's less exposure in the vicinity, too. (I wrote a critique of what was revealed of the study for BoingBoing.)

Bialik has one paragraph I'll quibble with:

His town did fund an experiment seeking to investigate whether Wi-Fi signals might harm trees. The experiment used Wi-Fi routers not because these were suspected as the major culprits — cellphone network signals generally are stronger — but because experimenters aren’t allowed to use cellular network transmitters, and besides it is difficult to find an environment without any cellular wireless signal as a control. It also isn’t clear why trees would be suffering only recently, while cellphone networks have existed for decades.

This must have been stated by van 't Wout or another interview subjectd, as it's all wrong. First, Wi-Fi access points would be further away and at vastly lower power than cellular base stations, and thus vastly less likely to be the "culprit." Second, researchers may test cellular signals in Europe. I have read dozens of studies in which cell transmitters are used in clinical settings in Sweden, Britain, Germany, and elsewhere. I'm sure there's red tape, and it may simply have been cost prohibitive.

Finally, you can find an environment without EMF: a shielded room. Since the plants were being tested indoors, two rooms could have shielded: one for controls, and one for exposure only from signals within the room. Again, the expense may have been too high.

This seems quite clearly that there was an agenda at work and little science involved.

Verizon Wireless Releases 3G Femtocell

D.C. Airports Drop Wi-Fi Fees in Spring

Washington Dulles and Reagan National will drop fees for Wi-Fi access in the spring: Contractual details remain to be worked out, this report says in the Washington Examiner. Dulles and National add to the growing list of major US airports that have dropped fees, starting with Denver as the largest.

SFO Gets Free Wi-Fi Early

LTE Is About Capacity, Coverage, and Latency, Not Just Bandwidth

AT&T's CTO has a blog post indirectly critiquing Verizon Wireless's early LTE launch: I pretty much agree entirely with this John Donovan post. Verizon's commitment to CDMA left it without a reasonable path to future higher speeds in 3G because Qualcomm's EVDO path wasn't compelling enough, and Verizon clearly wanted the worldwide advantage of converging on GSM.

That leaves Verizon stuck at about 3 Mbps downstream with EVDO Rev. A. Verizon Wireless clearly and testably has the most robust and most thorough 2G and 3G network coverage in the US. That's still an advantage and will remain one on the voice side and for a large number of users for whom consistency is more important than speed.

But its early launch of LTE is driven by a need to have a higher speed number to push to businesses and consumers while AT&T and T-Mobile complete rolling out HSPA 7.2 and HSPA+ (21 Mbps), respectively. These evolutionary 3G HSPA flavors provide most of the advantage of first-generation LTE, including somewhat reduced latency, while preserving full backwards compatibility all the way down to GSM rates.

AT&T CTO is pushing the message that moving from LTE speeds to EVDO Rev. A rates will be jarring to customers in terms of what's possible. I agree. The difference is so huge that they are effectively different networks—this is a similar problem Clearwire and Sprint have with 3G/4G converged service plans.

However, Donovan doesn't mention the three other advantages of LTE: capacity, coverage, and latency. Higher bandwidth doesn't just mean that everyone gets greater speed; rather, it means that there's more potential to serve simultaneous users at greater speeds. That's often just as important as peak data rates. Coverage is a factor, because the 700 MHz networks can reach further and penetrate indoors better than 850, 1700, 1900, and 2100 MHz networks.

And latency is huge: lower latency makes networks appear faster because the time for each initial connection for every transaction is reduced. LTE promises very low latency, and HSPA delivers a decent part of that. Reduced latency equates to better video streaming, crisper phone calls, and more responsive Web browsing.

AT&T will benefit from the coverage and capacity issues, based on customer complaints, more than Verizon. But an early LTE deployment focused on speed doesn't provide the full picture of LTE's potential, and it hides the gap Verizon will have for at least three years, if not longer, between current 3G speeds and its LTE promise.

Update: Clearwire's chief commercial office weighs in with a swipe on Verizon's LTE pricing.

Verizon Wireless LTE Launches 5 December

Minneapolis Network Profitable But City Uses Fraction of Paid Services

The Minneapolis city-wide Wi-Fi network is the only successful example of its kind for that scale of network: The next largest networks are far smaller or represent just part of a city. Even better, the Star Tribune reports that US Internet's operations are profitable four years into operation with 20,000 customers. The paper reports a $1.2m annual profit.

But why is it profitable? Because the city of Minneapolis agreed to pay $12.5m over ten years for services—services the city is hardly taking advantage of yet, even though departments are billed internally for them as part of their budgets. The city also prepaid some of these funds. This meant US Internet never ran out of necessary capital, as all its competitors more or less did, but the firm also didn't make new technology choices. It started with BelAir Networks gear, and it continues to use that vendor's equipment.

The failure to use prepaid services sounds much worse than it is. Having a viable additional broadband choice for service in a duopoly market, as well as one that's far cheaper than 3G cell for roaming within the city, has likely saved citizens millions of dollars over four years. Wherever there's the least broadband competition, cable and telephone companies drop prices, often better services, or have extended "introductory" offers you can renew by threatening to switch. It's hard to threaten if there's no second or third choice.

US Internet also pays into a fund to bridge the digital divide ($563K so far), and provides free Wi-Fi at 44 community centers.

As is usual with such efforts, the applications have followed the installation, and it's likely first-generation pilot projects didn't take off between early deployments of technology that wasn't ready and the economic collapse, which put some companies out of business or into retrenchment.

The city is starting to gear up, and within the 10-year contract, unused fees paid in previous years can be rolled over.

Aircell Unwires 1,000th Plane

Verizon Wireless LTE Launches 5 December

The 5–12 Mbps downstream 4G service will launch 5 December 2010 in 38 US markets and 60 airports: Verizon is still engaged in ridiculous pricing. The service will cost $50 per month for 5 GB or $80 per month for 10 GB of data transfer. Given that the cost per bit should be enormously cheaper for Verizon Wireless, and that they should be pricing this competitively with wired broadband carriers in the same market, that's absurd.

Clearwire's hybrid Sprint 3G/Clear 4G pricing makes much more sense. Unlimited usage on 4G Clear network, and same 5 GB limit on Sprint's home 3G EVDO network.

Carriers and ISPs continue to try to retain same limits even as services bump up faster. Comcast has the same 250 GB monthly usage cap on its cable service, whether you're at 15 Mbps or 100 Mbps.

LTE is required to serve next-generation mobile devices with streaming media, low latency, and heavy interactive use straining under CDMA 3G speeds today, although AT&T and T-Mobile move into faster HSPA rates alleviates that in part. But LTE will also become an alternative in some markets to fixed broadband, if Verizon offers sensible pricing.

You can check on which markets are covered at Verizon Wireless's 4G coverage map. I'm hoping to get review gear to test, as Seattle is a launch market.

Verizon Wireless Releases 3G Femtocell

Senators Want Free Wi-Fi in All Federal Buildings

I've read the bill and I still don't understand this: I don't quite understand why senators Snowe and Warner find it necessary to allot money ($15m) and force installation of Wi-Fi networks in federal buildings, starting with facilities run by the General Services Administration (GSA). The bill talks about offloading use from cell networks to Wi-Fi, but Warner's statement about the benefits is sort of insane:

"By starting with the nearly 9,000 federal buildings owned or operated by the General Services Administration, we will be able to provide appreciable improvement in wireless coverage for consumers while also reducing some of the pressure on existing wireless broadband networks."

The bill doesn't call for any free access, only neutral host systems typical for the cellular industry in which one firm operates a base station in an airport or other publicly accessible buildings, and charges a cost-recovery rate to other operators.

I wonder if carriers and providers have been unable to install Wi-Fi networks in federal buildings, and this is an override to GSA policies? There's clearly a constituency here that I'm missing.

SFO Gets Free Wi-Fi Early

Delta Expands WI-Fi to Regional Jets

This is a big shift in in-flight Wi-Fi: Delta is taking a big move in expanding its already extensive Wi-Fi coverage. Delta committed to full mainline fleet coverage—these are the larger planes that carry more passengers and typically fly longer routes—but regional jets seemed less likely. Shorter routes with smaller numbers of passengers would make it seem quite difficult to get a return on the investment.

Nonetheless, Delta has plans to put Gogo Inflight Internet on 223 of the Delta Connection subsidiary and partner aircraft. The planes have between about 65 and 76 seats, according to Delta's press release. More critically, all the planes have first-class sections, and the commitment appears to be put Wi-Fi service on all routes with first-class service.

It's possible that the investment is relatively low compared to the customer loyalty it may engender. Those who want continuous Internet access across a route, and who are more likely to buy or upgrade into first class may be so valuable that the amount realized in additional seats purchased and higher fares (as regional service is often not as competitive as national routes) is where the revenue comes from to balance the accounts.

Delta currently has over 700 mainline aircraft in operation, and 549 of those have Internet service installed. The regional jets will receive Internet service during 2011.

Aircell Unwires 1,000th Plane

Lufthansa Brings Back In-Flight Internet

Lufthansa announces new Wi-Fi in the sky service, FlyNet: Lufthansa was the biggest adopter of Connexion by Boeing in the early part of last decade, and wanted to reach an accommodation to keep it running when Boeing shut it down. The airline has been looking for the right partner to bring service back ever since, and Panasonic Avionics has come through. Panasonic started talking about relaunching a Connexion-like Ku-band satellite service in September 2006, even before Boeing down in-flight service (see "Panasonic May Relaunch Connexion," 19 September 2006).

Although the exact plane count isn't set, Lufthansa said it will equip almost all of its intercontinental craft, having service in place on all such planes by the end of 2011. It's possible that Boeing's Connexion retrofitting may make it cheaper to put in Panasonic's gear, too. The service starts with Internet access via Wi-Fi, although GSM/GPRS access (via an onboard picocell) will be added "in the future."

The pricing is quite aggressive. €19.95 or 7,000 Lufthansa air miles get you 24 hours of unlimited access across any equipped Lufthansa flight and in the airline's lounges. The hourly price is €10.95, which seems crazily high, but they want to push you to pay the 24-hour rate as a sweet spot. Lufthansa's long-haul flights can range from five hours to well over a dozen.

Service will be free until 31 January 2011, but the press release doesn't say when the first Flugzeug with restored access will take off.

(I wanted to write the headline: "Drahtlose Internet und Lufthansa Wiedervereinigen!" but I realized only five readers would get the joke.)

JetBlue Sets Mid-2012 for In-Flight Internet

Alaska Airlines Offers Free Wi-Fi Til 9 Dec 2010

American Honda Motor is sponsoring free Wi-Fi on Alaska Airlines: The offer is good until 9 December.

Alaska Airlines Has Internet Service in Half Its Fleet

Alaska Airlines Has Internet Service in Half Its Fleet

Google Frees Wi-Fi on AirTran, Delta, and Virgin America

Google has opted to underwrite free Wi-Fi over the holiday season on three airlines: AirTran, Delta, and Virgin America will offer free Wi-Fi from 20 November 2010 to 2 January 2011 under Google's sponsorship. Delta is, by far, the largest of the three airlines, and has hundreds of planes equipped. It's a promotion for the Google Chrome browser, which may a branding campaign in anticipation of devices appearing that run the Google Chrome OS.

Virgin Mobile Adds Unlimited 30-Day Usage Plan

Clearwire Cuts Staff, Growth, Future

Clearwire is digging in: The company, majority owned by Sprint, is shaving expenses. This doesn't bode well. With aggressive competition for 4G services from AT&T and Verizon Wireless, cutting back seems to make less sense than trying to double down. Clearwire is laying off 15 percent of its staff and delaying new markets and handsets.

Clearwire had already said it was testing LTE, the alternative to WiMax. WiMax's chief advantage was that it was available long before production LTE gear, and could take advantage of broad channels that Clearwire and Sprint had available in spectrum they'd acquired. LTE is now coming to market, and will be the dominant 4G flavor worldwide, while WiMax has developed into a useful niche technology that could retain double-digit marketshare even when LTE is the powerhouse.

However, how can Clearwire redeploy in the middle of a cash crunch? Especially with $2b in debt and other obligations becoming due in 2011, as Stacey Higginbotham reports.

Sprint Resignations from Clearwire Board Signal Little

In-Flight Wi-Fi and In-Flight Bombs

The NewScientist asks if in-flight Wi-Fi or cell use might be banned after Yemeni-originated bombs: Wi-Fi seems unlikely to be disabled for security reasons. A compatriot would be required on board to navigate the login process with an account or credit card, or a script would have to be written to handle that. It seems rather complicated and prone to failure. Otherwise, a compatriot would need to be on board, in which case the compatriot could trigger the event.

There's one potential for danger, which is DNS tunneling. Devicescape and other authentication systems work at hotspots by sending particular DNS queries through to remote servers that respond with information in special text records that can provide login credentials and other information. DNS is proxied and often scrubbed for hotspots, however, and I suspect that Aircell figured this out in advance.

On the cell side, only a handful of planes in Europe and the Middle East are flying with picocells on board that can be used to establish a phone connection via a satellite data link. A number of elements would also need to be in place for a remote connection to be established. A timer or air-to-ground cell link would be much more reliable.

I expect that authorities will scrutinize in-flight cell and Wi-Fi service for additional weaknesses, but I doubt any ban will be put in place.

Southwest Sets In-Flight Wi-Fi at $5

Can WPA Protect against Firesheep on Same Network?

Steve Gibson suggests using WPA/WPA2 Personal encryption on hotspots to prevent Firesheep from working among users on the same network: That's an interesting idea, but only for the moment. Gibson explains the weakness to his solution in a comment below the post. I recommend at the bottom a solution involving WPA/WPA2 Enterprise that builds on Gibson's recommendation.

The shared passphrase version of WPA lets an access point and Wi-Fi adapter (the "station") negotiate what's sometimes called a session key (the pairwise transient key). You can't extract or crack that session key without watching the initial association during which secrets are sent, but which a party with the passphrase could monitor. But not so fast. You just need to force a deauthentication—currently not guarded against in 802.11 or Wi-Fi, but which will be one day—and all the stations will run through their four-way handshake again.

Someone who might run Firesheep, a point-and-click credential theft Firefox plug-in and proof of concept, is likely to not download and install Wi-Fi cracking software that would aid in this. Aircrack-ng, the gold standard, requires some technical know-how to use.

But the code is freely available and licensed under the GPL. Firesheep is also free, open-source, and available. All it would take is an interesting party to combine the two into an active attack agent—perhaps called Firecracker. This would move use of the extension from potentially illegal in some jurisdictions (passive scanning may be legal, but sidejacking is probably a crime in most states and many countries), to definitely illegal in most areas (forcing deauthentication in order to obtain credentials). But it could still be a point and click operation.

Thus, a WPA/WPA2 Personal protected network would briefly afford some protection against Firesheep, it wouldn't be long lived.

The more sensible action is one I first heard discussed years ago. Enable WPA/WPA2 Enterprise (802.1X) on a network and give out the same user name and password to every user. This reduces the administrative burden of password management to zero, and allows any savvy visitor to get a higher level of protection. WPA/WPA2 Enterprise in the form of the most common method, PEAP, uses SSL/TLS to protect the handshake between station and access point, protecting the unique key assigned from even those with the same 802.1X login information.

Windows and Mac OS X have offered PEAP clients for years. Free clients for versions of Windows without it can be obtained. Linux has clients as well. There's no technical bar to set this up, just one of education. If you can't get users to employ VPNs, or they don't have access to them, 802.1X is a much simpler way to go.

Firesheep Makes Sidejacking Easy

Southwest Sets In-Flight Wi-Fi at $5

One beer or one Wi-Fi: It's not a surprise that the airline known for simple pricing and one-class cabins with no seat assignments opts for a flat rate. Southwest Airlines says it will charge $5 for in-flight Wi-Fi via Row 44 no matter the duration of the flight nor the device used. Other airlines, which use Aircell's Gogo Inflight Internet, are following a multi-class script, with different prices for red-eye flights and flight length, as well as a discount for mobile devices. $5 is the cheapest regular rate Gogo charges, and that's for overnight flights.

Southwest says it tested various prices, and this is what it came up with. I'm sure its passengers would prefer free, but $5 is a nice round number that seems low, and it will appear low in relation to fees charged by other airlines. I'll be curious if competitors react, but I doubt it. Southwest may be highly profitable and have a model that works, but it's still a "discount" airline; the full-service airlines try to retain a distinction, and charging more is one of those.

Southwest will have 32 planes equipped with Row 44 satellite gear by the end of December, and its fleet will be fully outfitted by the end of 2012, the Denver Business Journal reports. This is the first airline launch for Row 44, which has been pursuing customers since about 2006. Aircell has over 2,000 equipped planes in the air, and snatched Alaska Airlines away from Row 44 this year. (Aircell recently lit up some air-to-ground towers in the state of Alaska, with more to come.)

Alaska Airlines Has Internet Service in Half Its Fleet

Firesheep Makes Sidejacking Easy

The Firesheep Firefox extension is the perfect demonstration of how unsecured connections on open Wi-Fi networks can be sidejacked: Sidejacking dates back to 2007, coined by Robert Graham, who pulled together a variety of known and new vulnerabilities and packaged them into an automated session snatcher. Sidejacking describes the extraction of a session cookie from another user on the same network to hijack the live session that user has established with a Web site, such as Facebook or Twitter.

While a login to a site may be conducted via a secure session, many sites then drop you back into an unprotected connection in which a token stored as a browser cookie ensures the continuity of your actions from page to page. That token is vulnerable.

Firesheep turns sidejacking into a click-and-install demonstration with 26 built-in site profiles to snarf. I explain Firesheep, sidejacking, and how to defend against it—using notions of security I've written about on this site for years—in an article at BoingBoing.

Decaf on the Starbucks Digital Network

Eye-Fi Adds a View for Web Access

Eye-Fi View provides Web-based access to recent uploads: Eye-Fi is a long-time favorite product of mine. The company scrunched a Wi-Fi radio, computer, and storage into a Secure Digital (SD) card, and has regularly updated capabilities. The current line-up, X2, has 802.11n, endless memory (auto-delete threshold after confirmed uploads), and other features. I use mine constantly; I haven't had to plug my camera or its card into a computer in months. (Eye-Fi cards are available at significant discounts off the retail price at

Amazon.com.)

The latest update for X2 users is to Eye-Fi View, a Web site for viewing your recent uploads from anywhere that's tied in with the company's sync and management software Eye-Fi Central. (That software itself is a great update from the previous tool that used a Web browser, and was functional but clunky.) Eye-Fi View allows access to your images and videos at up to their full resolution to anyone to whom you send a private URL.

The service retains the last seven days of uploads at no cost. For $5/mo or $50/yr, you can upgrade to Eye-Fi Premium, which allows unlimited storage with no expiration of links or photos and videos. Eye-Fi View isn't enabled by default, otherwise you'd be uploading your pictorial evidence to Eye-Fi's servers without your consent—a bad idea, regardless of whether the photos and videos remain private or not. Eye-Fi View uploads to Eye-Fi Center, a Web site with the same name as the firm's computer software.

What does Eye-Fi bring to the table that Flickr Pro (at $25/yr) does not? Flickr Pro offer unlimited uploads and storage at full resolution for both images and videos. Flickr allows private sharing to groups you define (friends, family, or private groups you create). The public side of Flickr allows wide access to the rest of the net. I've had some of my images viewed thousands of times, which is gratifying.

However, sharing photos privately is a pain on Flickr if the group isn't identical each time. This is the same problem on many other sharing services, too, that assume either you want everyone to see pictures, or a group that's well defined and remains constant over time.

Eye-Fi View/Central are organized around simplicity (one control panel that automatically uploads), privacy, and changing members of the groups you want to share with. I'm not sure that's worth the $25/yr premium, but the market will decide that.

One advantage of Eye-Fi is that you can set this up for a friend or family member who doesn't want to have to hassle with photo transfers and such. The latest version can be configured to connect to a home's Wi-Fi network, and with endless memory, computer syncing, and Eye-Fi View, there's no management involved. (I've recently heard from several friends that their older parents have broadband for when their grown-up children visit! They rarely use it themselvs.)

Also announced today was an upgrade to allow Pro/Pro X2 owners to upload Raw format image files to an FTP server, which I'm sure photographers who work from that unprocessed style will find makes the Eye-Fi substantially more useful if FTP is part of their workflow.

And the online sharing and geotagging upgrades that can be added to less expensive models of Eye-Fi now can be purchased within Eye-Fi Center (the software not the Web site), and with lifetime prices of $20 for sharing and $30 for geotagging.

Google Restarts Street View without Wi-Fi Scanning

AT&T Wi-Fi Connections Keep High Growth with Free Service

AT&T released its Q3 2010 usage statistics for the company's US Wi-Fi hotspot network: 107m connections were made in the latest quarter across 23,000 US hotspots operated by AT&T. This is more than all of 2009 (86m sessions), and a total of 228m for the first three quarters of 2010.

That growth is fueled by several factors, which I discussed 22 April 2010 in writing up the Q1 2010 statistics ("AT&T's Wi-Fi Usage Report Omits Switch to Free by Most Locations").

At that time, AT&T was looking at a quarter of free McDonald's service, along with a simplified access deal that Starbucks had put in place in December 2009. The latest quarterly report again doesn't mention a significant factor: Starbucks removing all restrictions on use, no longer requiring any card or account to access its in-store Wi-Fi; that change took place in July.

AT&T also added more iPhone users and had the first full quarter with 3G iPad owners who, with an active 3G plan (it's optional to keep it active) have free access across all AT&T paid locations.

The numbers are impressive, but it's still strange to me that AT&T leaves out positive mitigating factors that show its strength across several lines of business that lead to these huge numbers of sessions.

The company provided a nifty visualization, too, downloadable as a PDF file. (Preview below.)

SFO Gets Free Wi-Fi Early

Wi-Fi Direct Certification Starts

Five chipmakers have certified Wi-Fi Direct reference designs: Wi-Fi Direct is a terrific addition to wireless networking where a device that offers a service can broadcast that service's availability, like printing or file exchange or what have you. It's a form of peer-to-peer networking that doesn't require an access point to intermediate, and is ideal for mobile devices, and devices that lack much of an interface. The first five reference designs have been certified a few months later than the original rough target announced last year. (See "Wi-Fi Alliance Peers into the Future with Ad Hoc Replacement," 13 October 2009.)

Wi-Fi Direct has a few things in common with newer Bluetooth devices that pair with less effort than in the original Bluetooth schema, and in that Bluetooth and Wi-Fi Direct both advertise available services. But the notion is that you get the speed (up to 802.11n) and security (WPA2 mandatory) of Wi-Fi with enormously simpler setup than connecting to a new Wi-Fi network for a moment and then setting up a connection with a specific device. And in cases in which you don't have an access point, such as trying to exchange a file between two mobile devices, it's extremely irritating. (On an iOS device, both parties could have a package like GoodReader that has built in WebDAV client and server software with Bonjour discovery, but you still need an access point to which both devices are connected, and security is an overlay.)

This announcement went around the world like a shot, but was typically covered incorrectly or incompletely in four ways. First, this is nothing new. The spec was announced a year ago; this is the culmination in silicon of that effort. It's great to see this implemented, because now we can move forward to have devices that support it.

Second, it's not yet available. The five certified devices are reference designs that other companies (OEMs or original equipment manufacturers), like Linksys, D-Link, Dell, Acer, and the like will build into products or relabel to sell under their own names. That means there's still some time to the market.

Third, this is host-side stuff—things to make a computer act as a Wi-Fi Direct enabler. It's not the technology needed for embedded client-side support in, say, an HP multi-function printer.

Fourth, there is no announced operating system support yet, even though Microsoft and Apple sit no the Wi-Fi Alliance board. That is not unusual for newly released hardware implementations of standards from the Wi-Fi Alliance or other groups. Apple and Microsoft both have near-term releases of operating systems upgrades on the timeline (Mac OS X 10.7 and Windows 8). It's most likely Wi-Fi Direct would appear in a new system, and might not be available in an older device.

Finally, and this wasn't addressed in any of the coverage I saw, you're going to need to see widespread adoption in mobile operating system platforms to make Wi-Fi Direct truly useful, and integration at a fundamental level of the OS. That means Android, BlackBerry, iOS, Palm WebOS, and Symbian (whichever version), as well as featurephone platforms from Nokia and others.

The reason is that mobile OS's, even the supposedly open Android platform, need to put Wi-Fi Direct hooks down into the driver level so that third-party developers can hook into a system-wide printing library that works with Wi-Fi Direct, or file-transfer support within apps.

Wi-Fi Direct is terrific, and I will be glad when it's widely available, But my prediction is that it won't have widespread impact until 2012. On the Wi-Fi timeline, that's perfectly fine. Each 802.11 standard as certified by the Wi-Fi Alliance has taken 2 to 4 years to percolate into the market. WPA2, rolled in 2004, is just now becoming the de facto security method, for instance. Wi-Fi Direct's greatest impact is on the future, not the present.

White Space Rules Avoid Pitfalls

WiMax and LTE Not Technically 4G by ITU Standards

The ITU sets the minimum for 4G designation: The International Telecommunication Union Radiocommunication Sector (ITU-R) has reaffirmed previous less settled criteria for what's a fourth-generation (4G) network. Current WiMax and LTE is nowhere near the cutoff point of 100 Mbps downstream for mobile and 1 Gbps downstream for fixed.

This isn't new, although this particular decision is new. I've been wondering by what logic Clearwire, AT&T, and Verizon were labeling current WiMax and first-generation LTE deployments as 4G, when they're incremental, welcome improvements over 3G. Some of it is architecture. As Stephen Lawson of IDG News Service notes, these networks were designed from day 1 for data, and are all Internet protocol (IP) from end to end. That's a huge improvement over 3G and it's a marked change.

The ITU-R doesn't do enforcement, and 4G isn't a trademark. Verizon Wireless and Clearwire told IDG's Lawson that the ITU-R move has no effect on their branding or deployment plans (nor should it on the latter).

My question for 4G deployment, of course, is that with it on track for 2014–2015 rollout, how realistic is it to come up with the channel widths necessary? It looks like the maximum speeds being discussed require extremely wide channels, like 100 MHz. That's not impossible, but no U.S. carrier has 100 MHz in a chunk that it materialize. The FCC white-spaces rulemaking frees up a bunch of 6 MHz pieces, and that's the last major realignment after DTV 700 MHz spectrum that I'm aware of.

The definition of 4G may now be set, but the ability to roll out 4G at anything like the minimum speeds promised seems highly problematic even in five years.

Sprint Resignations from Clearwire Board Signal Little

Decaf on the Starbucks Digital Network

I went to try out the network today in a nearby Starbucks to little luck: Your faithful WNN reporter likes to test the dog food offered by companies he writes about, and so I set out this Saturday to visit a Starbucks nearest my home (reportedly the second busiest in the United States) to try out the new Starbucks Digital Network (SDN). The results were poor.

The store has no branding for the service yet. I used my iPhone to try to bring up a launch page; no luck. I checked, and I was on the AT&T network, and a deep technical detail on the phone indicated that it was a Starbucks node. I visited Starbucks.com, and there was a movie on the home page explaining SDN, but no links to content.

Finally, I searched Google for references to see if someone had slipped out a URL. TechCrunch had a screen capture with a visible address. I typed it in (quite long), and was redirected to m.starbucks.yahoo.com—Yahoo is the back-end operator of this effort. (Visit that address outside a store, and you get an error page: "It looks like you’re trying to connect to the Starbucks Digital Network in partnership with Yahoo!. You can only do this when you’re connected to Wi-Fi at company-owned Starbucks locations in the United States.")

The page that came up was clearly not designed to be displayed on an iPhone. It's possible there's a custom page that should have been shown. I entered starbucks.yahoo.com to see if a better redirect would occur, but I was pushed back to "m." A few top-level items are promoted, although a Yahoo search banner dominates the top. Below that, a free iTunes download, a promo clip for Waiting for Superman, and something else I cannot now recall.

I tapped a banner for News way at the bottom (I suspect that's due to the wrong mobile UI being presented), and very very slowly, a page with links to the New York Times Web app, the Wall Street Journal, and other publications appeared. I tapped, waited, tapped, and finally checked other sites over Wi-Fi. Clearly, the network was overwhelmed—there were an ocean of laptops in the store.

That's not great for a rollout. Staff needs to be trained. Table tents or posters should be up. The splash page should work. Bandwidth should not be so scarce. It might have been a glitch, but a fairly glaring set of them.

Update: Chris Wichura sent in a photo of the flyer on the table in a Starbucks he went into. No URL. Splash screen didn't work for him, either, it sounds like.

Starbucks In-Store Wi-Fi Content Network Launches

Google Did Snag Passwords

I was sick of this story months ago, but...: It's significant when a search engine that already knows everything about us apparently unintentionally learns even more. Google earlier discovered, disclosed, and had third parties audit its collection of unencrypted data broadcast publicly over Wi-Fi while taking photos for its Street View images.

One might expect this would contain password, private information, and email, and Google said today its audits revealed that it did: "It’s clear from those inspections that while most of the data is fragmentary, in some instances entire emails and URLs were captured, as well as passwords," wrote a senior VP on the Google blog.

My reaction? If you're not using an encrypted connection to read email and you're not protecting your Wi-Fi link, then Google accidentally snagging some of your data is the least of your worries.

This is harsh, of course. The majority of users worldwide don't know how to secure their systems and data, nor should they. Operating systems developers, equipment makers, and ISPs have significantly improved basic encryption capabilities so that it's much easier and more likely a user with no special knowledge, after following setup steps, will have a secure link in place.

Take the simple matter of adding an email account to a mail client. In the olden days (say, 2007 and earlier), mail programs asked you to punch in details and connected only to servers and in methods you checked. A few systems and programs offered wizards to set up IMAP and SSL/TLS and authenticated SMTP and so forth, but ISPs were loathe to give everyone security service—too costly from an infrastructure standpoint.

That's changed. When I use nearly any program, host, or hardware to initiate some kind of connection, I am urged and sometimes hectored to use security, and often automagically taken into a secure realm. The iOS that powers the iPhone and iPad asks for email host details first, and then, invisibly, runs through a number of tests to see if it can establish one of several methods of SSL/TLS setups. If it can, it does. If not, it reverts to plain text, but also lets you modify the setup later.

Encryption is increasingly becoming the default. Google's "accident" should drive more people into figuring out how to solve their lack of security retroactively.

Google Permanently Halts Street View Wi-Fi Collection

Starbucks In-Store Wi-Fi Content Network Launches

Read the Wall Street Journal at no cost in a Starbucks over Wi-Fi: Starbucks first started talking about some of these ideas in...2001. Yes, the advantage of a decade on the Wi-Fi and hotspot beat is that you remember the first time this stuff came around. At that time Microsoft was a content partner, and would deliver local results in a walled garden. Times have changed, but just a little.

The Starbucks Digital Network is live, and requires a visit to a Starbucks store with a Wi-Fi capable device. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't know of any other effort that isn't quite limited—such as the movies available for rental at the Denver airport over its free network. All other location-specific, network-only content tends to be dull, like a portal with local weather reports.

The SDN gives you The Wall Street Journal for free, which otherwise costs over $100/yr. The New York Times is in on the action, with its New York Times Reader 2.0 Web app, which delivers a more interactive reading experience, akin to an iOS app. Apple will offer free videos and music. The awkwardly named Bookish Reading Club will let you read excerpts and full books in the store, too. Nick Jr. Boost, an $80/yr subscription service, is free on the SDN. Zagat's on tap, too. Other proximity-based content will be featured as well that's available for free outside of the coffeeshop's confines.

It's a clever move for Starbucks to counter its McDonald's competition, where Mickey D wants to service you quickly and send you on your way. Starbucks has peak hours of 5 am to 9 am, as I understand it, when people are inclined to move in and out fast in any case. After 9 am, the day at most stores unfolds more slowly, and lingering is a good idea.

Virgin Mobile Adds Unlimited 30-Day Usage Plan

Google Permanently Halts Street View Wi-Fi Collection

Cnet reports Google won't resume vehicle-based Wi-Fi location collection: Google had a passel of problems this year around the world related to how it was scanning for Wi-Fi and (it says) accidentally storing some publicly broadcast information. Google was collecting Wi-Fi network names, unique identifiers, and signal strength information and associating snapshots of such details with GPS coordinates while also taking pictures for Street View. Wi-Fi positioning systems can analyze a snapshot made by a mobile or desktop device and provide GPS-like results in urban and suburban areas.

But Google hasn't given up on scanning, as it can rely on location information from Android-equipped phones, which pretty much all have GPS receivers built in and a data path at nearly all times back to the central servers to deliver the Wi-Fi snapshots and associated location information.

Wi-Fi positioning is used to provide a quick fix where GPS satellites aren't as reachable, and works well indoors where GPS receivers in mobile devices function poorly. Skyhook Wireless was the pioneer in this area, but is no longer provided data (and thus receiving data) from Apple, and filed two lawsuits a few weeks ago alleging Google interfered in relationships Skyhook had with two major handset makers delivering Android-based phones.

Wi-Fi Data Collection for Location Expands

Verizon Wireless Releases 3G Femtocell

A chorus of yawns: The $250 femtocell has no calling plan reductions with it, but now it handles 3G voice and data instead of 2G only. Femtocells have a greater impact for carriers than for customers, many of whom could switch to another cellular provider. Femtocells should be a tool for customer retention, but it seems that no carrier has yet gotten the clue.

Verizon may have the best case for charging $250 (and no monthly fee) with the logic that if you can't get a clean Verizon signal, nobody else is going to be serving you any better, so you might as well plug into broadband for indoor cellular service.

Verizon’s Clever iPad/MiFi Mash-Up

Verizon's Clever iPad/MiFi Mash-Up

Apple is letting Verizon Wireless sell the iPad: The trick? Verizon will only offer through its 2,000-plus stores the Wi-Fi iPad, not the 3G model. The 3G iPad works only over GSM networks (up to HSPA 7.2). Instead, Verizon will sell you a plain Wi-Fi iPad ($500, $600, and $700 for 16, 32, and 64 GB); or, for an extra $130, it'll throw in a MiFi router. That $130 is the same price difference Apple and its partners collect for a 3G iPad over its Wi-Fi–only brethren.

Verizon pairs the iPad and MiFi with plans nothing like what the carrier has offered before. These are fixed-price, moderate-use offers with no termination penalty; the terms are just like AT&T's offer for the 3G iPad, but Verizon's prices are better. Verizon will charge $20 for 1 GB ($20 per GB over that) and $35 and $50 for 3 GB and 5 GB (with $10 per GB overage fees).

AT&T charges $15 for 250 MB and $25 for 2 GB for its 3G iPad plans. Additional units of each can be purchased at the same price after the 30-day period expires or you use up all the data. Virgin Mobile offers unlimited Sprint Nextel 3G broadband with a USB modem or MiFi for $40 for a 30-day period.

Because the MiFi can handle up to five devices over Wi-Fi, one could argue that if you don't need an iPad and do need a MiFi, this is a slick deal. Buy the package and sell the iPad without even opening its box. You'll probably get a few dollars under list for it.

Virgin Mobile Adds Unlimited 30-Day Usage Plan

T-Mobile Plans Prepaid Data Plans

T-Mobile will offer new data plans for USB adapters 18 Oct: T-Mobile has made several changes in the last year-and-some to reduce the cost to mobile broadband users with laptop adapters, as well as increase the predictability of the monthly bill. That included adding a no-overage 5 GB monthly plan (throttled, but not charged or cut off), and lower monthly prices for data service. Now, they're taking a page from Virgin Mobile.

Virgin Mobile now has a $40 plan for unlimited data over 30 days with no contract required, that works with either a 3G modem or a MiFi, both of which must be purchased in advance. T-Mobile's deal sounds a bit weaker, although its data network is faster. The three options are $10 for one week and up to 100 MB, $30 for one month and up to 300 MB, and $50 for one month and up to 1 GB. These are prepaid plans like Virgin Mobile's, with no contract or overage fees.

On the phone side, T-Mobile is switching to an AT&T-style data plan, with two unlimited voice and text plans. The $50/mo flavor includes 100 MB of data; for $70/mo you get 2 GB. A minimal plan includes 1,500 voice minutes or messages (any combination) and 30 MB of data.

Virgin Mobile Adds Unlimited 30-Day Usage Plan

T-Mobile's Throttled Limit Didn't Change from 5 GB

A series of stories yesterday appeared that said T-Mobile used to allow 10 GB per month of unmetered data use: This is incorrect. In April, T-Mobile switched from the standard U.S. carrier model of charging overage fees of 5 to 20 per MB for data used above 5 GB on the higher of two metered plans (see "T-Mobile Offers Overage Compromise: Throttling," 27 April 2010). Instead, T-Mobile switched to what European carriers typically employ. After using 5 GB during a billing period, the data connection is throttled to about 64 Kbps. Some customers might like paying $50 to $200 per GB over 5 GB; others might like the soft landing.

Stories yesterday, such as this one from a site devoted to T-Mobile news (TmoNews), stated, "If you may recall, previously the data cap was 10GB/month." I checked with a T-Mobile spokesperson, who confirmed my recollection was correct. I have spoken about this with T-Mobile several times, too, since April, and the cap was always 5 GB.

What may have spurred the confusion is a document that talks about such throttling starting "October 16"; TmoNews has a photo of the internal document meant for T-Mobile sales agents.

This kind of throttling, by the way, won't be mandated nor disallowed by the FCC under new disclosure rules it's imposing on carriers, but it certainly fits within the framework the FCC has set. The FCC wants sticker shock banished, and will force carriers to provide notifications before a customer hits a point at which fees will be charged. Many carriers offer mandatory or optional methods to be notified (at no cost) of such limits. But not all do, and international roaming is especially egregious. It's also difficult to turn off service to prevent such overages from happening accidentally.

T-Mobile, by pursuing throttling, with no extra fees involved, ensures customers on the 5 GB plan never pay an extra cent; they just have to cope with lower bandwidth.

Virgin Mobile Adds Unlimited 30-Day Usage Plan

Sprint Resignations from Clearwire Board Signal Little

Sprint executives leave Clearwire board: I missed this story of a week ago until sensationalist headlines started to appear reading more into the tea leaves than the murky water at the bottom of the cup. Sprint is the majority owner of Clearwire. That remains the same. Sprint has the power to appoint seven of the 13 board positions. That remains the same. Four of the seven board members appointed by Sprint remain in place, and Sprint will nominate three replacements for its executives.

The issue appears to be concern over whether Clearwire and Sprint's business objectives diverge sufficiently that Sprint executives or employees would make decisions that could be construed as anticompetitive or even detrimental to Clearwire shareholders. The SEC, Congress, and other forces have been pushing since the Bush administration to require boards made up of independent directors who have little stake in the current management of a firm.

The issue of whether this signals a partnership with T-Mobile or dropping WiMax seems secondary to the larger antitrust problem. And, if the company were considering partnering with firms other than Sprint for ventures, Sprint employees would be required to recuse themselves constantly, which is awkward for governance. Google CEO Eric Schmidt left the Apple board in part because of the growing competition between Apple and Google, and how often he had to leave the room while business was discussed.

Whether WiMax continues to be Clearwire's 4G flavor of choice won't be directly decided by this move. Sprint and Clearwire still need to prove billions of dollars invested to buy spectrum and build out a network weren't for naught. The widespread affordable availability of LTE is still two or more years away. Verizon might be launching dozens of LTE markets this year, but the gear will be 1.0, power hungry, immature, and in limited varieties. Clearwire can't afford to wait on LTE, and will still be deploying WiMax even if it makes a technology decision to switch to LTE in the future.

InfoWorld's Galen Gruman makes a number of conclusions in his WiMax Is Now Likely to Die article that I disagree with. Sprint execs leaving the Clearwire board won't affect ownership of Clearwire by Sprint, nor the inter-tie contracts in place between the two for network use and roaming. However, the likelihood of all US carriers and most worldwide carriers converging on LTE seems ever more likely.

Could Clearwire Dump WiMax for LTE?The Pipettes release new single

Comcast Launches 2,000 Hotspots for Subscribers

Comcast has followed in Cablevision's shows with members-only free Wi-Fi across its Northeast service area: The cable firm has launched 2,000 hotspots in New Jersey and Philadelphia. An Xfinity broadband account is required, and that account information is used to log in to the network.

Comcast, Cablevision, and Time Warner are using Wi-Fi to varying degrees to provide customers a reason to stay instead of considering Verizon. The Northeast seems like one of the only truly competitive markets in the country. Verizon versus cable providers has resulted in lower prices, higher speeds, and no monthly caps.

Kylie Minogue feeling broodyClearwire Adds Integrated Mobile Hotspots, New 3G/4G Modem for Macs

Washington, DC, Puts Free Wi-Fi on Mall

The National Mall in DC gains free Wi-Fi: The AP says it was a joint effort between the US Department of Agriculture, the Smithsonian Institution, and the DC city government. Cisco donated hardware; Level 3 backhaul.

Madonna puts music career on holdSFO Gets Free Wi-Fi Early

UMA Returns to T-Mobile

In truth, it never left them: New Android-based phones from T-Mobile will include unlicensed mobile access (UMA) calling that allows talking over Wi-Fi or cellular networks without using special apps or VoIP as such. This is a change in tactics for the firm, which deprecated UMA for the last year or more. The service isn't yet available, nor was pricing discussed in the press release.

T-Mobile introduced converged Wi-Fi/cell calling using UMA four years ago; I wrote one of the first articles about this for The New York Times as it was launched in the Seattle area. The service slowly rolled out nationally, and, as far as I could tell, was a hit among the sweet spot of the audience. That was people who had poor coverage in the home, rather than those exceeding their cellular data pool.

Unlimited cell plans started percolating out a couple of years ago, and T-Mobile's offer there trumped any advantage from the flat-rate, unmetered Wi-Fi calling service. (UMA's other advantage is seamless handoff between Wi-Fi and cell during a call, also not an issue with unlimited calling.)

At some point in the last year, the company's UMA details started to disappear, and new phones weren't featuring UMA. As far as I recollect, only a few BlackBerry models could be purchased new with UMA, although existing converged calling customers could use the service without a change. And T-Mobile pushed the service for businesses, where UMA could integrate right into the enterprise's Wi-Fi network, providing better pricing and call quality than use of a plain cell plan.

Today's announcement puts UMA back front and center, although I have a hard time understanding why it's important to the company. It gives them a slight advantage in very narrow areas, especially for budget callers.

The general tech media is covering this as an innovation and something spectacular and new. It's the problem with short memories.

Cheryl Cole and will.i.am mockedTravelers Find Hotel Wi-Fi a Necessity

FedEx Retail Locations Switch to Free Wi-Fi

FedEx has pulled the plug on charges at its FedEx Office outlets: These former Kinko's stores--I miss the old name--have had Wi-Fi for years, but it's been a for-fee service. Now, the delivery giant's 1,600 packing and shipping locations in the US will offer Wi-Fi at no cost; 1,000 already switched over, with the rest to come by the end of October. AT&T operates the service. It's smart: they come for the Wi-Fi, they stay for the shipping.

I couldn't recall whether the FedEx Office's chief competitor, The UPS Store, currently offered Web site. After 10 minutes on the company's site for the stores, I am still in the dark. The public relations folks at UPS told me there is no national offering. Rather, The UPS Store (formerly Mailboxes Etc) is on a franchise model, and each franchisee makes the decision. Some have, but the national office isn't tracking that.

Some restaurant chains that have a mix of company-owned and franchise-owned stores require new franchises to install Wi-Fi as a condition, while allowing old stores to remain Wi-Fi free if the owner chooses. That's part of why McDonald's didn't roll out to its entire US footprint initially.

Neither chain of shipping store is set up for people to come in and work caf style, but in the many outlets of each that I've visited, there's always a little area to get something done, at least briefly.

Update: A reader points out that FedEx Office locations he's visited are set with with workstation areas that he's spent hours in. So perhaps this will be a third place to work for some people.

Canadian Starbucks Stores Also Offer Free Wi-FiSeth Lakeman free download

AT&T Responds to Virgin Mobile with No-Contract Plans

Virgin Mobile's unlimited, no-contract data plan seems to have rattled AT&T's cage: Virgin back on 23 August announced a change in its no-contract plan options. Instead of four tiered plans, the highest offering up to 5 GB used within 30 days (on Sprint's network) for $60, there would be two: a $10/10-day/100 MB option and unlimited 30-day usage for $40.

That so undercut the rest of the market, I was wondering if there would be any response. Verizon has long offered a one-day $15 data pass, which always seemed overpriced to me since the market it was trying to reach were those with otherwise inactive 3G cards or MiFis.

AT&T's response appears to be a modest rejoinder. Three tiers: $15 for 100 MB used within a day, $30 for 300 MB used within a week, and $50 for 1 GB used within a month.

What AT&T doesn't seem to still realize is that Virgin Mobile's deal can be paired with a $100 MiFi (no contract), meaning that a few months of AT&T-priced usage would be outweighed by cost savings and flexibility. AT&T doesn't offer a MiFi-like device, and thus service is limited to laptop cards and notebooks.

It's a step in the right direction, as was AT&T's change to metered 3G broadband with reasonable overage charges for heavier users.

Virgin Offers MiFi without ContractLily Allen hopes to ‘fade into oblivion’

Aircell Unwires 1,000th Plane

Aircell has unwired its 1,000th aircraft: It's a Delta DC9 flying out of Detroit; lucky passengers will get free Wi-Fi access. Aircell says one-third of mainline aircraft flying each day in the US have its service onboard, for nearly 4,000 flights each day. Aircell's contracts should push it to 2,000 craft in 2011.

The question is, however, whether Gogo Inflight Internet will grow large enough to be profitable, for airlines to continue to want it, and for Aircell to thrive. It's impossible to know. None of the parties involved release enough numbers to perform a real analysis, and my estimates based on the limited data released indicate that the revenue is good but not great.

Aircell's service becomes most useful when it's predictably available for the routine flights of regular businesspeople. Then a fixed monthly subscription will make sense, companies will cover it for increased productivity--and there will be one more inescapable workplace in which you will toil. Excuse me: save time in the air.

AC/DC forced to cut Oslo gigJetBlue Sets Mid-2012 for In-Flight Internet

Row 44 Raises Money for Expansion

The in-flight broadband firm is yet to launch commercial U.S. service with a carrier, but just took in $37m more in funds: Row 44 launched itself several years ago as a Ku-band in-flight Internet provider for airlines that would make use of the many gains in antenna and receiver technology since Boeing's failed Connexion effort was designed, launched, and cancelled.

In the intervening years, the company signed up Southwest Airlines, but has yet to launch service commercially; it snagged Alaska Airlines, only to lose it to Aircell's Gogo Inflight Internet. Alaska made perfect sense for Row 44, given that Aircell cannot provide over-water coverage for Alaska and Mexico routes offered by the airline.

However, Aircell agreed to add many sites in the state of Alaska, and will at some point deploy in Canada via a partner as well.

Row 44 had a dilemma, from what I heard. It lacked the cash on hand to build out Southwest's service, and Southwest wasn't inclined to be the backer. With the additional money, I expect we start seeing Southwest Wi-Fi in the near future.

Aircell recently crossed 1,000 planes outfitted and in the air, and 2,000 is likely by the end of 2011. Row 44 has catching up to do, but it still has unique advantages for over-water and international flights.

OnAir was once a significant competitor in this market, but frittered away its huge lead time, and has only a handful of operator networks focused on mobile service (texting and email) rather than Internet access.

(Row 44 needs to spend a couple of dollars on its Web site. The press release and news sections are out of date.)

Alaska Airlines Has Internet Service in Half Its FleetWill.i.am says Ashley was ‘crazy’ to cheat on Cheryl Cole

White Space Rules Avoid Pitfalls

The FCC's rules on white-space spectrum seem rather clever to me: The rules adopted today in a unanimous vote by FCC commissioners--a rarity on major policy issues--should be good for all parties. That's hard to achieve. The full rulemaking hasn't been posted yet; an FCC spokesperson told me via email it would posted later today.

White-space devices will have to consult a geolocation database that's regularly updated to avoid stepping on the toes of television broadcasters and other users, notably churches, sports venues, and performing spaces that rely on wireless mics.

To help preserve the use of wireless mics without interference, the FCC will require two channels in the former 7 to 51 (VHF up to UHF) range be reserved in each market for such transmissions. Wireless mic users can petition for additional space, apparently for special events, which means white-space transceivers will have to consult the database on a regular basis.

It's unclear at the moment how devices will grab database info. I could imagine a narrowband repeating transmission on a dedicated otherwise unused channel that would simply dump the local database. White-space devices will certainly require GPS receivers, and computation power and software to figure out the area in which they operate as a distance from other points that have to be offset from use.

The Wi-Fi Alliance put out a press release immediately after, noting that 802.11af is already in progress for adapting WLAN IEEE rules for white-space spectrum and options, and that the alliance already has a plan under way to set a certification programs for such devices.

White-space isn't "Wi-Fi on steroids," but it could be a great enhancement for particular purposes in which Wi-Fi doesn't reach far enough, and a cellular network restricts uses while being overkill and too slow.

There's a potential for competitive wireless networks to emerge over white-space spectrum, but the real-estate issue still intrudes. You might need 1/3 or fewer transmitters per square mile to build a Wi-Space network instead of a Wi-Fi one, but you still have to secure the right to mount gear.

White Space Spectrum Rules Should Please Dolly PartonJames Yuill new single and live dates

JetBlue Sets Mid-2012 for In-Flight Internet

JetBlue has signed a memo with ViaSat for next-generation satellite-backed Internet service for its current 160-aircraft fleet: JetBlue is opting for Ka-band satellite rather than ground-to-air (Aircell) or Ku-band (Row 44, Panasonic). As I understand it, the Ka-band satellites, which use higher frequencies, are designed for greater capacity, but that may be a matter of marketing rather than technology.

There are a few things that are odd about this deal. First, it's a memo, not a contract, which means this isn't a done deal, it's just an intended deal. Second, mid-2012 is a long way away; this is vapor service.

Third, JetBlue owns a sliver of valuable ground-to-air spectrum (1 MHz) that it acquired at the same auction at which Aircell bought the 3 MHz it uses for Gogo Inflight Internet. JetBlue's LiveTV division technically bought the spectrum, and so far it hasn't done anything interesting with it (at least in public).

I understand the site at which this article may be found is called FlightGlobal, but it's peculiar to not mention Aircell or Gogo, given that Aircell has equipped over 1,000 aircraft that fly over the US with Internet service, with about 1,000 more committed by the end of 2011.

Alaska Airlines Has Internet Service in Half Its FleetWill.i.am says Ashley was ‘crazy’ to cheat on Cheryl Cole

Wi-Fi Data Collection for Location Expands

Excellent report on the state of Wi-Fi data collection and how it's continuing to expand: Google doesn't collect Wi-Fi from Street View (at least in some countries) following its data acquisition debacle, but Android does. And iPhones. And trucks driven by Skyhook Wireless. And other sources.

Bob McMillan at IDG News Service runs through how it works, the current efforts, and where privacy concerns lie. In general, publicly broadcast information is hard to contain, but McMillan examines the connection between collecting millions of SSID and MAC association by location and making this available in easily retrievable form, as Google does.

Google Restarts Street View without Wi-Fi Scanningwill.i.am blew £15,000 on clothes in 30 mins

Dubious about White-Space Overhyped Potential

I'm a bit dubious about the vast amount of overhype pouring out about white-space spectrum after the FCC's new rules were set (PDF file): I don't see how what's postulated is possible. The TV channels in question are 6 MHz wide. Shannon's Theorem always wins. Channel capacity is a function of bandwidth mitigated by the level and ratio of signal to noise.

Wi-Fi can use 20 to 40 MHz channels in 2.4 and 5 GHz, and likely 80 MHz or more in future 5 GHz iterations. Without multiple radio receivers, encoding improvements in 802.11n over 802.11g bumped the raw rate from 54 Mbps to about 65 Mbps. Take two radios and 40 MHz, and your raw rate approaches 300 Mbps. Three and four radios and 450 Mbps to 600 Mbps.

White-space spectrum can only be used in 6 MHz blocks. Even with an extremely efficient encoding, I don't see how one can get more than 15 to 20 Mbps out of a channel. I've seen several statements that white-space networks will hit 400 to 800 Mbps.

The high power that's allowed--4 watts EIRP, the effective power after antennas--is pretty remarkable. Wi-Fi is limited to 1w EIRP, and in the nature of radio waves a 4fold increase in EIRP means more than 4fold improvement in distant reception. Correction: Wi-Fi is limited to 1W of transmitter power, but 4W of EIRP. The greater range of white-space devices will come from much, much lower frequencies, which carry further and penetrate better.

However, my understanding is that by the same token, MIMO is ineffective because MIMO doesn't work over long distances. It requires reflection over short spaces to provide the multiple spatial paths that boost speed. So by going long, you lose MIMO, and encode with a single radio.

Also by going high power, you lose the advantage of cellular infrastructure, whether for Wi-Fi or 2G/3G/4G mobile networking. The greater area you cover, the more your shared medium is split among users, even in a contention-free scheduled environment, which will likely not be what happens. As an unlicensed band technology, you could be contending with interferers of all kinds the higher power you use and greater area you cover.

Now perhaps the 400 to 800 Mbps figure is if you took all the white-space in a given market and bonded it together with a transceiver that could handle multiple separate bands at once. Or it's 400 to 800 Mbps of aggregated additional capacity, not for one device. (I can't run down the source of the number, only uses of it without reference.) By that token, Wi-Fi in 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz would add up to several Gbps.

I also haven't run through channel maps in given markets under consideration. How many channels are free in urban areas where a dense deployment would make sense? One colleague wrote to say he believes only a couple may be available for unfettered use.

I'm not even getting into the issue of competing licensed uses, the set aside by the rules of two channels in each market for wireless mics, and the ability for special-event permits and special-use mic permits (limited in area) that would trump pure unlicensed networking purposes, too.

Further, there's a canard circulating about how Microsoft has "covered its campus" with two white-space transmitters. That's true--that's not the canard. No, the problem is that Microsoft can serve the space but not the user base with two transmitters, even if the transmitters could handle the mythical 400 to 800 Mbps of raw throughput. (I should note that Microsoft has nothing to do with spreading this notion; Microsoft Research has a been a very reasonable driver, promoter, and engineer on this spectrum. Visit the Networking over White Spaces site for more information.)

Microsoft installed thousands of Aruba Wi-Fi access points across its campus a few years ago not just to provide coverage but also to provide bandwidth. WiMax has been hyped in the same way. You can have distance or speed but not both: the more area you cover, the more users you cover, the more you have contention for air space or time slots, and the less bandwidth available to each user.

White-space spectrum will spawn a lot of interesting devices, and I could see companies and buildings migrating to it for particular purposes. But replace a cellular network or Wi-Fi? I'm not seeing it yet. I welcome more insight in the comments.

Sonic Youth, The Kills to appear on Elijah Wood charity albumWhite Space Spectrum Rules Should Please Dolly Parton

White Space Spectrum Rules Should Please Dolly Parton

I've always wanted to put the country-music sweetheart into a headline: Dolly Parton, megachurch pastors, and theatrical promoters object to white-space spectrum rules proposed by the FCC in 2008, that would allow unused television frequencies in any market to be employed for Wi-Fi-like networking with far higher signal strength. The low-frequency spectrum can also penetrate walls and obstacles far better than the 2.4 and 5 GHz ranges used for unlicensed Wi-Fi.

The opposition from that group was related to wireless mikes that rely on low-power use of frequencies that could be affected by new white-space gear. Other opponents to white-space rules included broadcasters concerned about interference, and owners of expensive licensed frequencies.

The FCC's new rulemaking, due out next week, will apparently address these concerns, while also removing some cost obstacles for producing the gear.

James Yuill new single and live datesCould Clearwire Dump WiMax for LTE?

Virgin Mobile Adds Unlimited 30-Day Usage Plan

Virgin Mobile has upped the ante on cellular data: Despite being owned by Sprint Nextel, Virgin Mobile is challenging all four major US carriers with an as-you-need-it, no-contract $40 unlimited 3G data plan. The plan lasts for 30 days. Virgin previously had four levels of service topping out at 5 GB for $60 used within 30 days. The new tiers are $10 for 100 MB over 10 days or $40 for unlimited data during a 30-day period.

Because Virgin Mobile also offers the MiFi cellular router for a low price ($150, no commitment), it now has a killer offering. Use a MiFi with an unlimited plan and avoid the overage fees or throttling from every other competitor.

This also guts tethering plans. I'm an AT&T customer with an iPhone 4, and I also own a 3G iPad (with no current active service plan). I typically now travel with the iPad and activate a plan on the road. I had figured on my next trip in which I needed a laptop, I would switch to tethering on my iPhone 4 (from a $15/200 MB plan to a required $25/2 GB plan plus $20 for tethering). That now seems unappealing.

Instead, I should pay the $150 for the Virgin Mobile MiFi, and pay $40 whenever I'm traveling. Then my iPhone and laptop can both use Wi-Fi to access Sprint's 3G network, and if I'm traveling with colleagues, I can share access with them as well.

Sprint recently dropped its MiFi offering (so far as I can tell) in favor of the Overdrive 3G/4G, which works on its Clearwire division's 4G WiMax network (no limits on use) and the 3G CDMA network with a 5 GB cap. (It's $350 upfront or $100 with a two-year contract at $60/mo.) You can also go to Clearwire and buy a similar product (the Spot 4G+) with a $55/mo service plan for the same terms.

Virgin Offers MiFi without ContractSeth Lakeman free download

Broadcom Opens Linux Drivers Up

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.wireless.general/55418">Broadcom has released its Linux 802.11n drivers as open source code: Drivers for several current chips are part of the full-source code release. This may seem obscure for wide consumption: why should you care what the relatively small market of people using Linux on a laptop do?

It's actually a big market. Versions of Linux are used on hundreds of millions of digital appliances, in which an "embedded" form of the operating system is used (one designed to be limited and robust to carry out a specific set of tasks, like driving digital video recorder).

Atheros went open source on a set of its drivers in 2008; Broadcom, for competitive reasons, may have needed to join them in 2010.

Skyhook Sues Google over Patents and PressureKurt Cobain exhibit opens in Seattle

NY Cable Firms Provide Limited Park Wi-Fi as Part of Franchise Renewal

Very interesting story out of New York City: Cablevision and Time Warner Cable agreed to spend $10m to build out Wi-Fi in 32 city parks as part of the requirements for renewing cable franchises in the city. The country is divided into thousands of cable franchise zones, in which local bodies negotiate with cable firms to allow monopoly or limited competitive access to rights of way and other resources in exchange for typically a gross-revenue fee, public-access and government channels with budgets and facilities, and other add-ons.

While franchise boards are prohibited by law, regulation, and court decision from considering broadband and VoIP service as a condition of renewal--only the FCC can regulate broadband, and voice is a separate state regulatory domain--this is a neat twist. The NY negotiators figured out that they can require broadband to be offered.

The New York Daily News (a competitor to Cablevision-owned Newsday) reports that the service will be available for 30 minutes free each day to users, and then charged at a rate of 99 cents per day. Correction: My brain apparently couldn't cope with the fact that it's 30 minutes per month ! In three 10-minute sessions, no less. That's fairly ridiculous.

Many New York parks have free Wi-Fi through various business districts and other sponsorship, such as Bryant Park.

WiFi Salon at one point had the contract to provide service in several parks, and had planned to use sponsorship as the driver. That deal with city parks ended in late 2008.

Virgin Offers MiFi without ContractJordin Sparks joining Broadway show

SFO Gets Free Wi-Fi Early

San Francisco International Airport (SFO) has launched its free Wi-Fi service: SFO is among the largest airports in the US to have pulled fee service off the terminal menu, replacing it with free. Denver (DEN) was the first large airport to make that choice a few years ago; Seattle's Seatac (SEA) went free earlier this year.

SFO Goes FreeSeth Lakeman free download

Skyhook Sues Google over Patents and Pressure

Bloomberg reports Skyhook Wireless has sued Google over two separate matters: It's no surprise to me that Skyhook might maintain it has patents that Google was violating for deriving location from Wi-Fi signals. Skyhook goes way back, when Google wasn't even showing ads on its search results, and Skyhook was still developing its initial database. The suit reportedly alleges four patents were violated.

However, the other charge in the suit is more surprising. Skyhook says that Google threatened Android handset makers Motorola and Samsung in a way that I didn't think was even possible.

Android is an "open" operating system in name only. Sure, you can get the source code and mess around with it, but there are no mainstream generic Android phones that work on any carrier, and no carrier-sold phones are simple to crack open and do what you will.

"Open" refers to a carrier's ability to modify the phone's software to its will, not the consumer or developers'. In fact, many Android phones come with garbageware installed on the phones' home screen, with no way to remove it.

Skyhook alleges that Google's Android chief, Andy Rubin, specifically pressured Motorola by stating that with Skyhook's technology on board, Motorola phones would be in violation of "Android licensing terms." Strange, for an open system. Samsung apparently also was pressured to remove Skyhook's software.

Update: I've read the lawsuit about Google interfering with business partners, and the specific issue at stake for Motorola and (ostensibly) Samsung was the use of the "Android Compatible" brand and program; without this certification, a vendor can't participate in the Android Marketplace, among other things.

Apple recently removed Skyhook Wireless technology from new versions of its iOS operating system, and is gathering location information itself. But no threats were alleged.

U2 rift as Adam Clayton sues financial managerGoogle Has Been Collecting Wi-Fi Data, Accidentally

White Space Rules Avoid Pitfalls

The FCC's rules on white-space spectrum seem rather clever to me: The rules adopted today in a unanimous vote by FCC commissioners--a rarity on major policy issues--should be good for all parties. That's hard to achieve. The full rulemaking hasn't been posted yet; an FCC spokesperson told me via email it would posted later today.

White-space devices will have to consult a geolocation database that's regularly updated to avoid stepping on the toes of television broadcasters and other users, notably churches, sports venues, and performing spaces that rely on wireless mics.

To help preserve the use of wireless mics without interference, the FCC will require two channels in the former 7 to 51 (VHF up to UHF) range be reserved in each market for such transmissions. Wireless mic users can petition for additional space, apparently for special events, which means white-space transceivers will have to consult the database on a regular basis.

It's unclear at the moment how devices will grab database info. I could imagine a narrowband repeating transmission on a dedicated otherwise unused channel that would simply dump the local database. White-space devices will certainly require GPS receivers, and computation power and software to figure out the area in which they operate as a distance from other points that have to be offset from use.

The Wi-Fi Alliance put out a press release immediately after, noting that 802.11af is already in progress for adapting WLAN IEEE rules for white-space spectrum and options, and that the alliance already has a plan under way to set a certification programs for such devices.

White-space isn't "Wi-Fi on steroids," but it could be a great enhancement for particular purposes in which Wi-Fi doesn't reach far enough, and a cellular network restricts uses while being overkill and too slow.

There's a potential for competitive wireless networks to emerge over white-space spectrum, but the real-estate issue still intrudes. You might need 1/3 or fewer transmitters per square mile to build a Wi-Space network instead of a Wi-Fi one, but you still have to secure the right to mount gear.

White Space Spectrum Rules Should Please Dolly PartonU2 rift as Adam Clayton sues financial manager

Dubious about White-Space Overhyped Potential

I'm a bit dubious about the vast amount of overhype pouring out about white-space spectrum after the FCC's new rules were set (PDF file): I don't see how what's postulated is possible. The TV channels in question are 6 MHz wide. Shannon's Theorem always wins. Channel capacity is a function of bandwidth mitigated by the level and ratio of signal to noise.

Wi-Fi can use 20 to 40 MHz channels in 2.4 and 5 GHz, and likely 80 MHz or more in future 5 GHz iterations. Without multiple radio receivers, encoding improvements in 802.11n over 802.11g bumped the raw rate from 54 Mbps to about 65 Mbps. Take two radios and 40 MHz, and your raw rate approaches 300 Mbps. Three and four radios and 450 Mbps to 600 Mbps.

White-space spectrum can only be used in 6 MHz blocks. Even with an extremely efficient encoding, I don't see how one can get more than 15 to 20 Mbps out of a channel. I've seen several statements that white-space networks will hit 400 to 800 Mbps.

The high power that's allowed--4 watts EIRP, the effective power after antennas--is pretty remarkable. Wi-Fi is limited to 1w EIRP, and in the nature of radio waves a 4fold increase in EIRP means more than 4fold improvement in distant reception. Correction: Wi-Fi is limited to 1W of transmitter power, but 4W of EIRP. The greater range of white-space devices will come from much, much lower frequencies, which carry further and penetrate better.

However, my understanding is that by the same token, MIMO is ineffective because MIMO doesn't work over long distances. It requires reflection over short spaces to provide the multiple spatial paths that boost speed. So by going long, you lose MIMO, and encode with a single radio.

Also by going high power, you lose the advantage of cellular infrastructure, whether for Wi-Fi or 2G/3G/4G mobile networking. The greater area you cover, the more your shared medium is split among users, even in a contention-free scheduled environment, which will likely not be what happens. As an unlicensed band technology, you could be contending with interferers of all kinds the higher power you use and greater area you cover.

Now perhaps the 400 to 800 Mbps figure is if you took all the white-space in a given market and bonded it together with a transceiver that could handle multiple separate bands at once. Or it's 400 to 800 Mbps of aggregated additional capacity, not for one device. (I can't run down the source of the number, only uses of it without reference.) By that token, Wi-Fi in 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz would add up to several Gbps.

I also haven't run through channel maps in given markets under consideration. How many channels are free in urban areas where a dense deployment would make sense? One colleague wrote to say he believes only a couple may be available for unfettered use.

I'm not even getting into the issue of competing licensed uses, the set aside by the rules of two channels in each market for wireless mics, and the ability for special-event permits and special-use mic permits (limited in area) that would trump pure unlicensed networking purposes, too.

Further, there's a canard circulating about how Microsoft has "covered its campus" with two white-space transmitters. That's true--that's not the canard. No, the problem is that Microsoft can serve the space but not the user base with two transmitters, even if the transmitters could handle the mythical 400 to 800 Mbps of raw throughput. (I should note that Microsoft has nothing to do with spreading this notion; Microsoft Research has a been a very reasonable driver, promoter, and engineer on this spectrum. Visit the Networking over White Spaces site for more information.)

Microsoft installed thousands of Aruba Wi-Fi access points across its campus a few years ago not just to provide coverage but also to provide bandwidth. WiMax has been hyped in the same way. You can have distance or speed but not both: the more area you cover, the more users you cover, the more you have contention for air space or time slots, and the less bandwidth available to each user.

White-space spectrum will spawn a lot of interesting devices, and I could see companies and buildings migrating to it for particular purposes. But replace a cellular network or Wi-Fi? I'm not seeing it yet. I welcome more insight in the comments.

Ronnie Wood calls in Slash, Eddie Vedder and FleaWhite Space Spectrum Rules Should Please Dolly Parton

AT&T Responds to Virgin Mobile with No-Contract Plans

Virgin Mobile's unlimited, no-contract data plan seems to have rattled AT&T's cage: Virgin back on 23 August announced a change in its no-contract plan options. Instead of four tiered plans, the highest offering up to 5 GB used within 30 days (on Sprint's network) for $60, there would be two: a $10/10-day/100 MB option and unlimited 30-day usage for $40.

That so undercut the rest of the market, I was wondering if there would be any response. Verizon has long offered a one-day $15 data pass, which always seemed overpriced to me since the market it was trying to reach were those with otherwise inactive 3G cards or MiFis.

AT&T's response appears to be a modest rejoinder. Three tiers: $15 for 100 MB used within a day, $30 for 300 MB used within a week, and $50 for 1 GB used within a month.

What AT&T doesn't seem to still realize is that Virgin Mobile's deal can be paired with a $100 MiFi (no contract), meaning that a few months of AT&T-priced usage would be outweighed by cost savings and flexibility. AT&T doesn't offer a MiFi-like device, and thus service is limited to laptop cards and notebooks.

It's a step in the right direction, as was AT&T's change to metered 3G broadband with reasonable overage charges for heavier users.

Lily Allen hopes to ‘fade into oblivion’Virgin Mobile Adds Unlimited 30-Day Usage Plan