[RFI] Why is this interference any different than BPL
n2scj at msn.com
Wed Aug 29 19:12:34 EDT 2007
A few days later Microsoft responded that the device under question was
From: rfi-bounces at contesting.com [mailto:rfi-bounces at contesting.com] On
Behalf Of Donald Kemp
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 5:20 PM
To: RFI at contesting.com
Subject: [RFI] Why is this interference any different than BPL
Saw this from my Google alerts. If they turned down this, which is in
a specific frequency band then how is BPL so different. More political
Aug 8, 11:07 AM (ET)
WASHINGTON (AP) - The government gave a failing grade to a prototype
device that Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) (MSFT), Google Inc. (GOOG) (GOOG),
Dell Inc. (DELL) (DELL) and other technology companies said would beam
high-speed Internet service over unused television airwaves.
The Federal Communications Commission on July 31 said the devices
submitted by the technology coalition could not reliably detect unused
TV broadcast, and could also cause interference.
Despite the setback, FCC chairman Kevin Martin said Tuesday the agency
still would like to find a way to transmit high-speed Internet service
over the unused airwaves.
In a statement, the technology coalition - which also includes
Hewlett-Packard Co., Intel Corp. (INTC) and Philips Electronics North
America Corp., a division of Netherlands-based Royal Philips
Electronics NV (PHG) - said it will work with the FCC to resolve any
The technology companies say the unlicensed and unused TV airwaves,
also known as "white spaces," would make Internet service accessible
and affordable, especially in rural areas and also spur innovation.
However, TV broadcasters oppose usage of white spaces because they
fear the device will cause interference with television programming
and could cause problems with a federally mandated transition from
analog to digital signals in February 2009.
RFI mailing list
RFI at contesting.com
More information about the RFI