Google Looks to "White Space" Spectrum

Nerdposeur writes "After maneuvering the major carriers into agreeing to open access rules via the recent spectrum auction, Google appears to be looking into a new area of spectrum that could provide internet connectivity. 'In comments filed with the Federal Communications Commission, the Internet leader outlined plans for low-power devices that use local wireless airwaves to access the 'white space' between television channels. A Google executive called the plan 'Wi-Fi 2.0 or Wi-Fi on steroids.' Interestingly, Google has Microsoft, Intel, and others on their side in this one. Was this spectrum their target all along?"

Microsoft Device

Is this the same technology that Microsoft has tried to demo (twice) with less-than-spectacular results?

Re:Microsoft Device

Woah.

Woah.

Your "weak but still watchable televsion 5" will disappear in 11 months anyhow, [wikipedia.org] before any of this can get implemented. And since channels 2-5 are generally bad for DTV, they will probably keep their new channel, which is almost certainly UHF.

And depending on lots of factors, including antenna direction and getting a relatively recent DTV tuner, your "weak but still watchable" signal might get replaced with a crystal-clear signal. (DTV actually has more problems within 10-20 miles of the transmitter than with distant reception.)

Re:

Digital degrades poorly. I'm about 20 miles from most of the nearest transmitters. The analog signals are fuzzy, but quite watchable. The digital signals are completely useless, frequently going to blue screen. I have tried multiple indoor and outdoor ante

Re:Microsoft Device

If you're having trouble at 20 miles, then your problem is multipath interference. Basically, reflections of the signal off of various objects in an urban area are delayed copies of the original signal. With an analog tuner, this results in ghosting. With a digital tuner, this results in being unable to decode the digital signal. Older ATSC tuners in particular are very bad about rejecting multipath interference.

Rotating your antenna will affect your signal quality. (I have to adjust my roof antenna every two or three months because winds knock it out of position and I lose CBS.) Installing an attenuator in the signal path may result in better reception. The worst thing you can do when you are that close to the transmitter is to use an amplified antenna. The amplifier may distort the signal in a way that reduces the signal quality.

Also, your tuner should have a signal "strength" display. This is usually in fact a signal quality display. Often 75% is the threshold below which there is not enough good data for the error correction to work. If it has an audible signal meter, turn up the TV volume to where you can hear it outside while adjusting the antenna, and set it to the most finicky channel.

when I was kid

you could tune the satellite to be almost on a station, right on the 'edge' of the station, and get around the blocking method they used for PPV... you would get a blurry picture but good sound. Great way to watch porn when you're a 12 year old.

Don't take that away google. Think of the children.

Re:

Heh, heh, I remember that.

Johnny: What's that -- I think it's a boob!!
Timmy: Nope, just some dude's shoulder. Maybe next time, Johnny.

White Space?

Hm, all that Python must be having an effect on them.

If it is, then that's real strategic thinking

Get your biggest competitor for bandwidth to spend all of their money on the spectrum you don't want by executing a feint in that direction, and then taking over the spectrum you really wanted.

It's almost like someone who reads those business books that are based on military strategy actually figured out how to apply the military concepts to competition...

Re:

Get your biggest competitor for bandwidth to spend all of their money on the spectrum you don't want by executing a feint in that direction, and then taking over the spectrum you really wanted.

It's almost like someone who reads those business books that are based on military strategy actually figured out how to apply the military concepts to competition...

Or maybe they read one of those "you can do it! Just visualize!" books and then visualized a kick-ass business tactic...

Re:

Ah-ha. Surely there is a graphical representation to explain this. Google image search to the rescue!

So are the digital channels being moved from the gaps between the current analog stations to other frequencies? Or are these "micro frequencies" in

It's a simple enough idea

and with digital television on the way, much easier to implement without interference. The UHF channels used on your television (most households in the USA have some cable or Satellite feed so don't use broadcast television really) have a small amount of bandwidth between each. If you combined that bandwidth with multiple radio links or some transmission technique, you could use it for WiFi like services locally in the home. The strength of signal could be such that it wouldn't interfere with neighbors reception ( as most aren't using broadcast television anyway) and it gives out more spectrum for home use.

Additionally, there are methods to use a small footprint in the WiFi band to herd the small signals between tv channels. It would look like frequency hopping, require much smaller signal strength, and would cause negligible interference to broadcast television. Simpler still is to allow the user to input the television channels they do watch so that interference is even more remote. If you can steal (locally only) use of channels that are not used at all in the area (how many stations are on channel 63 or 42?), there is literally TONS of bandwidth to use, and all of it at a better frequency range for non-line-of-sight transmissions. That is to say; better signal quality at lower signal strengths.

I wonder if the whitespace compiler will work...

http://code.google.com/p/spacesharp/

I used to have a native x86 whitespace compiler, but I never could read my code.

This just might be a great idea

I suspect that it won't be long before "internet" will be a basic service like "electricity" or "telephone".

The only big problem left to solve before true high speed access would be available to nearly everyone is the method of distribution. Using existing service wiring is problematic. Telephone wires aren't adequate due to bandwidth and signal / noise problems. Running networking over power wiring is not workable; it has all the problems of using the phone wiring but much, much worse. Running networking over the cable TV systems is the most functional - but cable doesn't go to every town and house and not all cable systems are compatible.

There's been a push to "wire" the country with glass fiber. They've even got it all the way to the house in some areas. As they build out the fiber networks they'll gradually reach more and more customers. But there's a BIG problem here: there's a huge number of houses and apartments to cover. The phone and electric systems grew up with the country, as each new home / subdivision was created these services were connected; essentially, the phone company took 100 years to get wiring to every residence.

To start out now and try to connect every residence - the magnitude of this problem is staggering. Assuming 100 million residences, if the army of installers could run fiber to and connect 10,000 residences every day - it'd take over 27 years. And that assumes the installers would be working 7 days per week. I'm not even going to try to estimate the cost of doing this.

If workable and reliable long-range wireless networking is developed / proven - and there's RF bandwidth that it can use - this could connect large number of residences inexpensively and quickly. Just plug your network cable into the "network radio" and you'd be online; no army of installers required. This would make it possible to make high speed access available to almost everyone in much, much less than 27 years.

I'm glad to see that Google is putting their resources behind making this a reality. It's not going to be easy to make this kind of technology work reliably but there's some very bright people at Google and if anyone can find a solution they can.

Dangerous for PAs

This idea is horribly dangerous for anyone running a PA. That "whitespace" is where wireless mics run. They use UHF/VHF frequencies to communicate between the receiver and the mic itself. I recently toured the Shure Plant in Niles IL and they pointed out that these whitespace devices are causing an extremely large amount of harm to something that's already standardized to run in the whitespace. I don't know, it really kind of worries me that my wireless mic systems won't work anymore, or that, when I go to a concert, the artists will be limited to cable length.

Re:

Follow your heart == tell them what they want to hear

Re:

Maybe it's just me, but Google seems to be this huge juggernaut of mediocrity and rehashed advertising.

And a provider of search.

And a provider of email services.

And a provider of chat services.

And a provider of shared calendaring services.

And a provider of domain-wide hosting of the above.

And a provider of web-based mapping tools.

And a supporter of numerou

Re:

When people say, "Google just does advertising," what they're really saying is, "what has Google done for me this week that I didn't know about last week."

No, what they're saying is that the only way Google makes hard cash is by selling advertising space. Nothing on your list makes them any money.

Of course making money isn't the most important thing in life. Unless you're a publicly listed company with sha

Re:GOOG is OOLD news

In fact, as people have become more skilled at gaming Google, and Google is the only show of note in town, search has actually got worse.

Oh I don't know about that. They went through a stage search returns being buried in junk pages. That's gone now, or substantially so. Certainly I no longer have the problems I used to.

You're sort of making the assumption that the internet is static, so google aren't moving.

What's really happening is the internet is a constantly seething morass of junk, exploits, and bot created pages who's sole intent is to gain control of your machine. In the face of that I'm surprised google still manage to sift through the shart and produce useful results.

Re:

This article http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2007/04/what-has-google-done-in-search-lately.html [blogspot.com] disagrees with you. It may be from last year, but I've seen other search related features show up on that blog.

In fact, that blog is on my list and it seems

Re:

Which is 100% better than untargeted advertising. Some of it I don't even mind. If google gets to the point where it is offering suggestions as well as people I know, they'll strike gold.

I'm looking to buy a new computer, right now there are 4 forms of mar

Re:

You're talking about teletext [wikipedia.org]. It used extra space in the TV channel for text broadcast. With today's technology, the same bandwidth can be used for decent bandwidth communication instead. The two are not really related except for using the same frequencie

Re:Already been done?

Teletext doesn't use space between channels, it uses space between frames. Analogue TV is a modulated version of the signal that is sent directly into the CRT. For each line, there is a series of peaks and troughs setting the intensity along the scan line[1]. TV resolutions are defined in terms of a number of lines and an aspect ration, rather than a number of columns, for exactly this reason, since signal along a line is analogue (you can squeeze in more, smaller, pixels if you have a good enough signal to noise ratio). At the end of each line, the electron gun is turned off and moved to the start of the next one (you could scan alternate lines right-to-left, but I don't think anyone does. I could be wrong though). At the end of each frame (technically, each field, since TV is interlaced), the gun is turned off again and repositioned pointing at the top-left of the next field.

Each of these repositioning takes time and the signal transmitted in this period is ignored by the TV (since the gun is turned off). Teletext works by encoding digital data in the signal during this period. You can only transmit a small amount of data in this period, but you can do it every frame and it will be buffered inside the receiver.

[1] Colour TV is slightly more complicated.

Re:Google is already Old Media

You do know that Google owns You Tube right?

Re:White Noise?

Well, yessss, but guard bands (in lower case) are necessary for TV stations and such not to bleed into each other. That doesnt mean an entirely different modulation scheme wouldnt be able to utilize the bandwidth without interfering with the broadcasts. The newer software radios can operate below the noise threshold, and I can't see how more traditional broadcast methods would be interfered with. Older analog broadcasts are hugely wasteful of the RF spectrum.

Perhaps Google engineers are just smarter than you are :-)

Re:

Wireless Internet is desperately necessary. WiMAX and 3G are well on their way. And once you have reliable wireless Internet access, suddenly your costs are going to go down. It's just like what happened with cable and satellite TV. Before satellite, c