Biased Against BPLAnonymous reader has bone to pick ( old news - 11:45AM Monday Dec 20 2004) tags: Op/Ed · BPLAn anonymous user writes: "I find that your lean is clearly anti-BPL and it is slanting the news to that extreme - you are doing the public no good service with that outdated view. Not only is BPL here to stay and likely to account for 33% of Broadband in the next few years, but it is very important to communications going foreward (sic) in the U.S. and the world". It continues: "Our country absolutely needs to impliment (sic) a Broadband catch up program IMMEDIATELY because we are way behind the world in that key technology. Continuing that way, will severely cripple the U.S. in job creation and competition with the modern business world.""BPL is a fast way to regain our position and allow for the MBPS speed needed to future proof our Broadband communication needs. Your bias and similar views from the ARRL are outdated and counterproductive to the interests of America. Wake up and smell the coffee."The coffee is brewed, our nostrils are operational, and BPL still isn't ready for prime-time. As noted in our recent editorial by an industry engineer, power-lines simply aren't well suited for data, and some significant advancements are needed for the technology to have a serious future as a broadband alternative without impacting the airwaves. You need only look at the long list of global failures to determine that so far, it's BPL that isn't fully brewed. There's also a growing list of domestic trials that are being shelved, with no plans of further expansion. In fact, out of 160 investor-owned utilities in the United States, dozens have conducted BPL trials, but only one (Cinergy Corp. in Cincinnati) exited the trials with plans for further expansion ( CED Magazine, October '04). Even Earthlink, who's involved in trials, isn't optimistic that BPL has much of a shot against DSL or cable. A ringing endorsement? Many of our readers either believe the technology is going nowhere, or it needs more time in the oven. It has nothing to do with bias, or wanting the technology to fail; if it's fast, cheap and works well, they'll buy it, and we'll gladly applaud it. While the FCC (and the companies ready to profit from the technology) are understandably bullish about BPL, most of the industry believes BPL is an unproven niche technology. As it stands now, it's a cable, fiber, DSL and wireless future, until BPL advocates can prove otherwise.
Related:- Tech Media Discovers FCC Staffed With Dunces, Lobbyists
- The Wall Street Journal's Google Hatchet Job
- Consumer Group Wants $44 Billion For U.S. Broadband
- Why Are ISPs Still Advertising Limited Services As Unlimited?
- VoIP Dead, Not Dead, Depending Who You Ask
- ISPs Won't Admit Participation In New RIAA Plan
- Ex-Verizon Exec Testifies To Pennsylvania Corruption
- Verizon's Open Development Initiative? So Far It's A Joke
|
 electric_dsl
join:2004-07-20
Pickering, ON | old It mus be a very slow day when you guys start posting badly spelt letters to the editor.
not to mention i think we have all seen why bpl is retarded.
my day is already boring enough! | |
|  | | | | NetEng_Dude
join:2004-07-17 | Re: old Expect silence. The facts are not on the side of BPL. No independent test results to assess, just continuing distortion and exaggeration from their Sales and Legal mouthpieces about user satisfaction, number of homes passed, blah blah blah. | |
| | | | | | 
earthborg
@midco.net | dumb bpl lets create the borg collective have internet implaneted into are head most cell phones seem to be glued to the now way not have borg collective internet. | |
| |
MAC121
@167.206.x.x
| "If man were meant to fly, they would have wings!"
"She's a WITCH, hit her with rocks!"
All you Luddites will be in for a rude awakening when the FCC rewrites the Telcom act to promote competition and add the "third-wire" to every home in America. Then the NTIA will be free to allocate BPL its own bandwidth and legitimize it with licenses, franchises etc. all around.
This will leave hammers holding on to less then you previously had! After all, are ten thousand HAM radio operators going to hold back millions of potential consumers? I think NOT!
The AARL should start to negociate for a better piece of the spectrum pie. | |
| 
dg2
Premium
join:2004-01-22
Lowell, AR
 ·Cox HSI
| What was he reading? I have found BBR and Karl to be pretty objective regarding BPL, presenting both sides of the issue. Clearly there are still concerns with the technology, particularly from an interference standpoint but also with other cost and operational issues.
While BPL may prove viable, it's hardly the cure-all it was once presented to be.
Good work BBR and Karl Bode. | |
| | | | |
dg2
Premium
join:2004-01-22
Lowell, AR
·Cox HSI
| Re: What was he reading? I don't find it "bashing" to point out that there are issues with the technology. Other than doing that, I have found their presentation to be right down the middle - and on a technical website I expect to see the difficulties of new technology published along with the proposed benefits. | |
| | | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD | Gee, every article, I have seen here, shows both sides of this argument.
You don't have to like the fact it is a bad technology, just accept it. | |
| | | VirtualLarry
Premium
join:2003-08-01
| said by toddbs98  : Hmmm don't know what site you been reading but I have yet to see an article on this site that did anything but bash BPL. Well, have you read about any actual successful technical tests or deployments of the technology? I think that most BBR readers are rightfully skeptical of some of the claims made about the tecnology, and similarly, concerned about the potential hazards due to interference with existing technologies, such as emergency-services radio communications networks, airplane navigation systems, and amateur radio broadcasters, which are often critically-important in times of regional emergencies.
I would compare BPL and communications, to "FMD"/cubic/holographic and storage. They make a lot of promises about potential future capabilities, but nothing has really been proven to world in the real world, outside of the lab, yet.
Once it does, I expect to see coverage of those successes here as well - well, if it ever does prove successful outside of the lab, that is. | |
| | |
dg2
Premium
join:2004-01-22
Lowell, AR
·Cox HSI
| Re: Good Rebuttal From what little I know about the technology, I think it's doubtful that it will bring broadband to unserved areas. If you can't economically justify putting repeaters (RTs) on existing telephone lines, I doubt you will be able to economically justify putting BPL repeaters on existing power lines. Unless there's a big cost differential between RTs and BPL repeaters... | |
| | | 
totamak
And they call me nuts?
join:2000-10-24
Los Angeles, CA | Re: Good Rebuttal Actually it's not feasible at all. You need repeaters at 1000 meter intervals, DSL repeaters are good for about 3000 meters. So unless a BPL repeater is less than 1/3rd as costly as a DSL repeater, the economics are against it. | |
| 
AbBaZaBbA
Premium
join:2002-07-10
Long Beach, CA | at least at least it'll provide some more competition to the cable/dsl companies if it ever gets off the ground. That can't hurt. | |
| | 
hailinfantry
Bizarro Quinn
Premium
join:2004-01-18
Brooklyn, NY
| Re: at least said by AbBaZaBbA :at least it'll provide some more competition to the cable/dsl companies if it ever gets off the ground. That can't hurt. How? It's slower. It has to be repeated more often. It has huge interference issues. It doesn't scale as well as the other solutions....
Fiber is the answer, folks. In the meantime, the best alternatives are from the cableco/telco and similar entities. | |
| | N3EVL
join:2004-12-13
Shrewsbury, MA
| said by AbBaZaBbA :at least it'll provide some more competition to the cable/dsl companies if it ever gets off the ground. That can't hurt. Can't hurt? - I disagree! While competition is good, making a failed, disruptive, intrusive technology the basis of that competition is just plain wrong. | |
| | | 
MoeDumb
I already have a Messiah.
Premium
join:2002-09-23 | Competition is good but BPL may screw up things that work well now. | |
| jporter07
join:2004-03-22
Mobile, AL | I predict A flame war. | |
| 
Qumahlin
Never Enough Time
Premium,MVM
join:2001-10-05
West Chester, PA
| Obviously the writer knows nothing about BPL He states we need BPL to catch up with other countries offered speeds...Perhaps he should take a trip to a large portion of the eastern hemisphere such as England, France, UK, Scotland, Ireland, etc, etc all have speeds that are equal to or slower then MOST US providers...
Perhaps he should read about how BPL does not offer fast speeds and in fact data rates far slower then most of the current Cable/DSL ISP's...
Perhaps he should state why in gods name he thinks a technology that isn't liked in the industry is magically going to be deployed and have 33% of broadband users switching to use it...
--
Forum Posts:6000 | |
| | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD | Re: Obviously the writer knows nothing about BPL Will you stop trying to use logic?  :D:D | |
| | | | NetEng_Dude
join:2004-07-17
| BPL no sense, no substance Proprietary, low performance, based on unsound engineering, a proven spectrum polluter, failed trials, ice cold reception from Wall Street and most of the power industry, etc.
It does not appear to be going well at all for the BPL hypsters. Reality has not dealt them a kind hand.
Say no thanks to BPL. There are too many exciting developments in the world of real next generation broadband including ADSL2+, DOCSIS, 802.16 (WiMAX), 802.20, Fiber To The Home (FTTH), etc. | |
| | | 
David803sc
Premium
join:2001-02-22
Charleston, SC
| Re: Dear Mr. Powell We don't need no stinking BPL. first of all the technology causes interference, its true it does. not only to Amateur Radio Operators, but to public safety, CB and commercial shortwave broadcasters just to name a few. But do we believe the power companies care? they don't, they see another way to make some money its pure greed at the expense of many others.
And their B#$%S#$% about how it will improve the power grid, they will have to run fiber to remote nodes, than inject the signal on the last mile, so that argument doesn't fly they wont make any improvements to main transmission lines for BPL.
Rural America? another ridiculas argument, again becuase they just like Cable and Telco's aren't going to pay the big bucks to build the fiber backbones needed out in these rural areas, just look at where they been testing it and where they have announced future plans, NYC, Raleigh, NC Charlotte NC just to name a few, all places where there is plenty of Cable and DSL, I dont see one BPL trials in any area that is not currently serviced by another Broadband provider.
and has the Editior pointed out look at all their failures it doesn't work andit won't work.
David | |
| | | 
Sr Tech
Premium
join:2003-01-19
New Fairfield, CT | Re: Dear Mr. Powell Ditto Mr.dbeatson
| |
| | | | roady1
join:2003-11-13
Cleveland, OH
| An admission... I've been using powerline technology in my apartment for the past 12 months. True, it's not the fastest thing in the world. True it's not the easiest thing in the world to configure. True it might never catch on as a mainstream technology. But I love it. And since I'm billing 8 of my neighbors $25 a month for 6/768 access without running any wiring, I don't mind that it doesn't go mainstream. I'd like to think that the small scale application and distribution projects could benefit from the technology at least. | |
| 
Derch
Premium
join:2004-10-16
Tulsa, OK | Curious I'm really curious if this "anonymous" Powell supporter had hard facts to support his case. | |
| IDATA
join:2004-11-03
Apopka, FL
| BPL BPL has it's advantages being able to reach almost anywhere in the US.
The technology does need to mature considerably to be accepted, but it is a great way to provide broadband and growth. The power companies need to better the technology and ham's need to stop crying like children.
I however feel wireless is the future in the US once it matures a bit more. Wireless Internet will soon be accessible like cell phones. | |
| | 
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| Re: BPL said by IDATA :BPL has it's advantages being able to reach almost anywhere in the US. That's a misconception that has served as one of the drivers of BPL. It can't reach anywhere in the US without a lot of equipment and backhaul for the traffic. Using your logic, we should have broadband everywhere that POTS lines are since DSL travels over copper pairs. BPL can't simply be turned up at a generation plant and it's everywhere.
The technology does need to mature considerably to be accepted, but it is a great way to provide broadband and growth. The power companies need to better the technology and ham's need to stop crying like children.
I think broadband customers need to stop crying like children because they can't get cheap Internet and expect everyone to drop what they're doing to supply them with service. The fact is BPL has problems that affect communications services. There's nothing emotional about it. Regulations were created to protect communications and best utilize wireless spectrum. I hear more whining about BPL needing special treatment so it can exist from people having no clue how it works or what its problems really are. | |
| |
ShujinTribble
@adelphia.net
| "...and ham's need to stop crying like children."
If the technology (BPL)
1) doesn't conform to the technical specs it's assigned to
2) causes problems to people the spec is supposed to protect
3) no enforcement by the spec's overseeing body
Then Brian, what do you propose these people DO? (Getting kicked in the nuts over and over for no reason does not make for happy people, you know.) | |
| | N3EVL
join:2004-12-13
Shrewsbury, MA | Matures you say?
The technology has already matured - like old gorganzola - it totally stinks.
Don't you get it yet? - Put 2 - 80 MHz on unshielded wires and it will radiate. No amount of maturing can alter that. | |
| 
gwion
wild colonial boy
Premium,ExMod 2001-08
join:2000-12-28
Pittsburgh, PA
| Even if they get it to work well enough ... ... it has no future. It would better serve power companies and the industry and public as a whole if the power co's would string separate fiber or copper plants on the rights of way they own, if they really want in on this, and provide the services... the technologically sound way, instead of chasing after a novelty/niche technology left over from the mid sixties, and now relegated mostly to things like sending signals to and getting data back from controls and automation systems, to carry the traffic.
I've never been biased. But I sure as heck think it's a waste of time and money, inerference issues aside. Spend the money getting the latest technologies deployed to those rural users, not sticking them with a retro-technology that may or may not even work, acceptably. Those wires and the rest of that outside plant are ancient, to boot, and were never designed to carry high-integrity data traffic.
I just want to see the money spent on developing and bringing cutting edge, future proof technologies to everybody, not see good money follow bad into foot dragging, tentative, good enough for now interim technologies that cost plenty of money to deploy...
What's important for sending communications technology forward isn't rushing deployment, it's building the cutting edge in modern, dependable, future-proof infrastructure.
Finally, it's entirely unclear how this works, in a business model. I don't know how power co's are regulated, but are they subject to anti-cross subsidization regs, like telcos are? I would hate to think that our electric bills were all subsidizing BPL... just scratching the surface, there. Does the company always place maintaining the power distribution function above the broadband function? They better, because broadband's precious little use if the power's always fluctuating and going out.
It may be an alternative, but it's certainly not a magic bullet. It's not even proven. And I doubt it's going anywhere, for two reasons. First, it's an archaic idea, four decades old as a practical concept, and much older than that as an abstract theory and geeks' tinker toy. It's been explored in depth through the end of the last century, for various purposes, and the only real things that have come out of it are control/automation systems, intercoms that crackle and hiss, and some poorly received home networking concepts, that typically can't (in the real world) break one or two mbps transfers half duplex, servicing a small home LAN. Second, it has very little room to be upgraded and expanded. DSL, fiber and cable will race past it until it looks just like a 24k modem looks to us, today, and the best thing they'll be able to do is string fiber under the copper wire... like they should have, if they wanted in this, to begin with... and provide two separate systems sharing a right of way. It's virtually guaranteed to be obsolesced within a few years, and there's essentially no upgrade path that leads anywhere.
That, in a nutshell, is why I'm skeptical about it. Not biased against it, at all... bias implies making a judgement in advance, and closing your mind to the facts. In ths case, 've reviewed the facts, and my purely personal analysis and sense is that it's plowing money and efforts into what's just plain the wrong technology, for the wrong purpose, at the wrong time.
--
Semper Eadem
- ... his original destination's just another story that he loves to tell. | |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| BPL - fast Deployment? "BPL is a fast way to regain our position and allow for the MBPS speed needed to future proof our Broadband communication needs. Your bias and similar views from the ARRL are outdated and counterproductive to the interests of America. Wake up and smell the coffee."
How is BPL a fast way to regain our position? It would be much faster to merely use the copper pairs that are going to every household in America for DSL. Equiping the US for BPL would require so much equipment, transport, and money.
The 33% figure is unfounded, and my best guess is that the author sees BPL as being an equal player with DSL and cable and getting a third of the pie. Merely existing doesn't mean equal market penetration. Cable and DSL aren't going to fall over and let BPL sneak in and take that much of the market share.
How are the views from the ARRL outdated? BPL to this day still interferes and must jump through hoops to protect licensed services from interference. BPL hasn't magically fixed its problems causing ARRL views to become invalid. Just last week I was driving around the PA systems and found emissions on several HF bands. Notching and frequency agility was developed in the past two years but hasn't be proven to fix the problems.
I don't see how BBR is slanted as they have posted positive news and industry press releases whenever they come out. It's not their fault if there isn't much positive news to report. Readers' comments are what they are. You're free to debate BPL in this forum. | |
| markopoleo
join:2003-04-02
Bonne Terre, MO
·Charter Pipeline
| I have to agree, DSLreports has given it a bad rap BPL works, just because utilities don't continue with it does not mean they given up on it. I saw first hand it working, and it works as advertised. It will be part of a internet option to people, but it is not designed to be mass rolled out like cable/dsl. Its main selling point (and it IS selling) is rural area's that giving cable/dsl is not going to happen.
Most of the stuff people complain or think is wrong with BPL harp on the things everyone else says and take it for fact. Esp interference issues, hardly any of that even happens anymore because of advances in tech around it. | |
| | 
Minister
join:2002-01-02
Fleeting | Re: I have to agree, DSLreports has given it a bad rap quote:
Esp interference issues, hardly any of that even happens anymore because of advances in tech around it.
Specify what those advances are. | |
| | 
FLECOM
Bay Networks Freak
Premium
join:2003-03-03
Miami, FL
| said by markopoleo :Most of the stuff people complain or think is wrong with BPL harp on the things everyone else says and take it for fact. Esp interference issues, hardly any of that even happens anymore because of advances in tech around it. ESP eh? so all those psychics will still be able to see the future... cool...
and sending HF frequencies over long unshielded cables turns them into GIANT antennas with huge output power... no matter what they do (short of shielded power lines, not going to happen) there will always be interfearance from bpl in the HF/SW bands
--
BellSouth sucks | |
| hedyd4u
Premium
join:2003-12-16
Schenectady, NY | What bad rap?? The only purpose BPL serves is a write off to the power companies when the trial fails. This service will never provide broadband to anyone that is not already served by DSL or cable. | |
| 
Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY
edit:
December 20th, @05:44PM
| Biased, I don't think so In the beginning when BPL first reared it head there where posters on this forum who where ecstatic about what they where reading there was a great deal of derision of those of us who are Ham radio operators, and other who have knowledge of the physics of the electro-magnetic spectrum. We educated them by presenting the facts. Now this subject and the exposed false promises of BPL are now treated with contempt. It isn't Bias it is knowledge of the facts.
--
Real Men use Vacuum tubes, 25 pound filament transformers, and plate voltages no less then 2400 volts...BPL I'm coming to get you
| |
| |
layman
@ina.hr
| Re: Biased, I don't think so same kind of things same type of fv*cking experts were sayin bout alternating current some 120 y. ago, shiish. If you boost DSL signal too, hm too much you can also scr*w up anyting, from phone lines, wireless communication, even anyone health. Some fv*cking rule goes for (TV) cables also. To conclude, FCC gave BPL a green light, so like with DSL and cable before, in fact does anyone still remeber same kind of crap "it's dengerous for anyone" was ones sayed bout cable and DSL? Shiish, and yes alternating current can kill you, use a direct one, as Edison advocated in 1880s, mo*ons! | |
| | |
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| Re: Biased, I don't think so said by layman:
same kind of things same type of fv*cking experts were sayin bout alternating current some 120 y. ago, shiish. If you boost DSL signal too, hm too much you can also scr*w up anyting, from phone lines, wireless communication, even anyone health. Some fv*cking rule goes for (TV) cables also. To conclude, FCC gave BPL a green light, so like with DSL and cable before, in fact does anyone still remeber same kind of crap "it's dengerous for anyone" was ones sayed bout cable and DSL? Shiish, and yes alternating current can kill you, use a direct one, as Edison advocated in 1880s, mo*ons!
Who said DSL and cable was dengerous...errr..dangerous? Quote an article, a speech, a press release... anything.
Your analogy to the AC/DC debate really doesn't apply here. Everyone today says BPL works and is a viable broadband solution. Everyone insisted that the Earth was flat 600 years ago, and look it was round. There, I've proven BPL isn't viable with an analogy.
DSL uses frequencies up to 2.2 Mhz, but it's a self-shielding medium. Cable uses frequencies up to 1 Ghz or so, but that also is a shielded medium. BPL is not shielded. When DSL and Cable are installed correctly, they don't radiate RF energy, or amounts that are so low they are negligible. BPL when installed correctly radiates whatever frequencies it's using. | |
| | | |
layman
@ina.hr
| Re: Biased, I don't think so hm, so what hapens to devices, even people if signal amplitude within "protected" cable or DSL is elevated i.e. twice, 4x, and 10x? What hapens to tose individulas wich still use 20-40-even 60 y. old phone cables to receive their DSL signal? What hapens to cable net desighned for 1000 users in early 1980s which has doubled or tripled? Are tose signals still within safe margins? Are tose RF, and also EM figures from such outdated, warn out cables, still so neglible? It's interesting how you avoid question of signal strenght (amplitude) and talk only about modulation frequencies. In general, any argumentation you use against BPL can be sayed, in fact was sayed gainst DSL some years ago... There are in general zillions of miles of different types of warn out cables (power, phone, TV) within older buildings, with perspective to leak or are leaking RF and Em radiation even today sometimes up to dengerous levels. So, simple question is not who will become forced to install new and safe cables, but whan? And what will be cheaper to install in order to receive TV, soon HD TV, Broadband and soon super broadband, than voice & video, phone signal and only God knows what kind of signals from all from one safe cable and one type of safe plug, or to triple or quadriple such investment in order to be safe. Sooner or later any household will be forced to install safe cables, and will likely use BPL technology in future. I am realy imaprtial joudge, as I was and am still also fair advocate of DSL technology. But it will become obscolete as soon as non RF and EM leaking aka safe (not d-em-gerous) cables are put on market with acceptable prices. | |
| | | | | Bait_hammer
join:2002-12-16
Victoria, BC
| Re: Biased, I don't think so quote:
Are tose RF, and also EM figures from such outdated, warn out cables, still so neglible?
Even older wiring still has a degree of shielding greater then powerlines, and if the sheathing gives way the signals in question are still far less disruptive and low powered compared to a powerline. | |
| | |
Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY
| What a vacuous argument. Edison was the one who pounded the drum against AC electrical transmission because he had so much money tied up in his DC dynamos, and he hated George Westinghouse because he was blowing him away with his alternators. Even Edison admitted late in life the AC/DC battle was one of his biggest mistakes. Please try to become a little more knowledgeable about the history of the late 19th centaury before you start to argue your premise.
--
Real Men use Vacuum tubes, 25 pound filament transformers, and plate voltages no less then 2400 volts...BPL I'm coming to get you | |
|
Citi-xen
@rr.com
|  HAM's and the ARRL
| |
| | | |
|
|
ALERT: ARRL distorting facts on BPL progress...
·
:p
·
·