There's also the issue of global market/demand that would drive higher volumes, attract more chip options, and lower the cost. 900mhz also suffers from this issue - there's not enough countries with the same band open. This one is harder to fix.
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016, 6:51 AM Mark Radabaugh <[email protected]> wrote: > The FCC caved to NAB and made the out of band emission rules excessively > strict in TVWS, making equipment difficult and expensive to build. The > 6Mhz channel sizes are too narrow for significant throughput. To get > significant bandwidth multiple channels have to be bonded, which multiplies > the cost since now you need 2 or more RF receivers. The equipment also has > to be wide band to cover the spectrum, yet with very tight filtering. > > Basically - a badly designed set of FCC rules, as designed by committee. > The perfect compromise - nobody is happy and everyone lost. > > There is actually hope - there are a number of vendors that have solved > the problems and should have product available shortly with decent > bandwidth. > > Mark > > On Feb 22, 2016, at 6:21 AM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote: > > Oh....that being the case, why is there no equipment?� It seemed like > everybody was excited for TVWS ten years ago.� If there's no excitement > now, it's probably because they got tired of waiting for it and moved on > with life. > > If Cambium or UBNT made a 700mhz product where the subscriber equipment > was not $800 and actually worked ok then I have to think people would buy > it. > > > On 2/22/2016 6:14 AM, Mark Radabaugh wrote: > > There are several vendors offering the database for TVWS. � The > equipment manufacturer picks and contracts with the database vendor in > TVWS. � �For CBSD (3550-3700) the WISP will need to pick the database > vendor. > > Mark > > > Please note the mailing and shipping address change below: > > Mark Radabaugh > Amplex > 22690 Pemberville Rd > Luckey, OH 43443 > 419-837-5015 x1021 > [email protected] > > On Feb 22, 2016, at 6:09 AM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote: > > Does anyone know why the location service never happened? > Were the feds supposed to do it, or did they need a private entity to do > it? > > On 2/21/2016 11:13 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: > > I will always wonder of the location database came from me.� I did an ex > parte with the FCC years ago when this was first being discussed.� I > wrote up a white paper describing the location database and how it would > work.� What they adopted was essentially exactly what I wrote up.� I > added it being a profit center for the FCC where you would pay to play.� > � > That is not to say it was not an obvious solution that was undoubtedly > thought of by many people at the same time.� > � > > *From:* Josh Reynolds <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Sunday, February 21, 2016 9:00 PM > *To:* <[email protected]>[email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] TVWS > > � > > There was just an email about this a few weeks ago. > > Consider it dead, it might as well be. All the gear is alpha crap with > very low bandwidth and extremely high cost for the capabilities. > > I believe the location database was never created either, but I'm not sure. > > On Feb 21, 2016 8:32 PM, "John Woodfield" < <[email protected]> > [email protected]> wrote: > > Is it dead? Anyone deploying it? Anyone besides Carson selling it? >> > � >> � >> � >> > John Woodfield, President >> Delmarva WiFi Inc. >> 410-870-WiFi >> >
