Sidecut Reports

The one thing missing from an otherwise excellent breakdown of AT&T’s iPhone woes by Wired today is a detailed explanation of why Ma Bell’s antiquated backhaul infrastructure and lack of available wireless spectrum are the main reasons why AT&T couldn’t cope with the iPhone data demands.

We’ve heard all about how the unprecendented data surge caught AT&T unawares, even though its top executives once claimed that handling the iPhone’s demands wouldn’t be a problem. A couple years later, and the company still hasn’t gotten things right. Don’t shareholders, investors, partners and customers demand a better explanation than a vague promise to move heaven and earth to fix the problems? How long will such data-free answers suffice?

We’ll know more when AT&T holds its quarterly conference call this Thursday — as in, we’ll know if Ma Bell is going to provide real answers, or perform more duck and hide.

Normally known for his intelligent takes on all matters regarding telecom policy, our pal Harold Feld shows his technology and market chops with an excellent post today about why he thinks the so-called “death of WiMAX” may be a precursor to a long, active afterlife.

You should, of course, read the entire wonderful post but to sum up Harold’s points — WiMAX may be surpassed by Long Term Evolution (LTE) as the eventual 4G market “standard,” but that’s not going to happen for awhile and with lots of gear and services deployed, it’s not like WiMAX is going to disappear off the shelves like Betamax tape players. A great post to bookmark and remember after all the “death sentences” for WiMAX inevitably appear.

If you like the idea of smart, concerned and passionate people being involved in the government’s oversight of all matters broadband then you should welcome the news of the FCC naming University of Colorado associate professor Douglas Sicker as its new chief technologist.

News reports and releases can spell out Dr. Sicker’s considerable resume and background, but they really don’t tell you what I think is the most important attribute Sicker will bring to the FCC, namely his passion for good technology and finding the best solution. Though we’re not close friends, I can attest from several meetings with Dr. Sicker at confabs like the old PFF Aspen Summits and at the wonderful Silicon Flatirons events in Boulder that he is not just knowledgeable about complex legal and technical matters in the communications world, he is incredibly enthusiastic about finding the best answers — making him a perfect fit to be the FCC’s CTO.

Sicker’s appointment is just the latest in a string of smart-people moves from CU to the government, following Phil Weiser’s jump to the DOJ and the impressive idea of a new technical advisory group led by CU telecom legend Dale Hatfield. Congrats to all, especially to Dr. Sicker. Looking forward to great results, soon!

Given that the Washington D.C. Court of Appeals today smacked down the FCC’s ham-handed attempt to impose net neutrality rules on Comcast from a couple years ago, it’s no surprise that many folks are proclaiming this to be the end of net neutrality and a blow to the Obama administration’s telecom plans.

They should know better.

All this does is mark the start of the real battle for not just net neutrality, but for control over matters broadband and beyond.

In reality, today’s decision is probably a somewhat welcome one for the Julius Genachowski-led FCC and the Obama telecom troops, since it officially removes the taint of questionable decisions led by former FCC chairman Kevin Martin from the net neutrality debate. Martin, the friend of big telcos like AT&T and Verizon, ostensibly presided over the implementation of the net neutrality “principles” back in 2005 and then the Comcast case itself. But being by all accounts a very smart guy, Martin is probably laughing out loud somewhere now, knowing that his tactics and decisions probably got the end goal he and his backers truly wanted — mass confusion around net neutrality and the FCC’s role in adjucating it.

Though we’ve sort of been off the policy beat lately, I remember asking lots of insiders about the Comcast decision after it was initially passed, and even the most pro-net neutrality types all thought it would eventually be overturned like it was today. “Good result, bad process” was the way one net neut proponent summed up the original FCC ruling. Good call.

But since Obama’s election, Genachowski and other administration types have been busy looking well beyond the Comcast case, putting in motion not only a separate net neutrality proceeding, but also developing the recently released national broadband plan, which if executed as described will go a long ways toward making net neutrality principles part of everyday regulatory practices — not by trying to define the slippery idea of net neutrality itself but by implementing a raft of actual measurable, enforceable things like truth in broadband-speed advertising and transparency in network management practices.

Should the broadband plan’s metrics-based ideas come to pass, network service providers would have a hard time hiding the kind of dubious practices that got Comcast in hot water in the first place. And just like with the health care bill, Obama and the Democrats probably have all the votes they need right now to pass new net neutrality regulations should they so desire — in fact insiders we have talked to in the big telco camps fully expect that some sort of net neutrality regulation will appear before the end of the year. But that also means they’re gearing up to fight it, if for no other reason than to keep the nuns safe from Google.

We digress. Clearly there is much more still to happen, and we’ll be watching while it does. But the end of net neutrality? In reality, a much bigger battle for the ultimate control of the nation’s networks has just begun.

LAS VEGAS, NEV. — CTIA — I know it’s March Madness time, but a hoops analogy just doesn’t work to accurately describe the size of the can of whoop-ass that Sprint and Clearwire opened up on AT&T and Verizon here Tuesday at CTIA.

This wasn’t a Northern Iowa getting hot at the right time and busting brackets by sinking some gutsy 3-pointers. Instead, it felt more like the Tampa Bay Rays coming into the Bronx and scoring 10 runs while tossing a no-hitter at the Yankees in Game 7 of the World Series. This was an upset built over time, with some big bets on long-thought strategies finally coming to fruition. And it may not be the last time this happens, either.

For longtime industry observers, it was simply shocking and amazing to see the No. 3 wireless carrier — one long percieved as struggling — and its upstart WiMAX partner garner all the headlines, all the buzz and even talk some
serious smack about AT&T and Verizon at what is traditionally the two telcos’ big Vegas party.

It wasn’t just that Sprint and CEO Dan Hesse (left) announced the coolest phone of the year, a device made more impressive because of the high-speed WiMAX network it can run on; it wasn’t just that Clearwire announced a bunch of new markets for 2010 launches, including Los Angeles and Miami; and it wasn’t just that AT&T and Verizon basically had nothing new to say, in front of the biggest yearly gathering of U.S. wireless industry insiders.

It was all of that together, and how it produced a day that saw the big carriers acting timid and cautious while Sprint and Clearwire were openly gloating about their new devices and their fast, high-capacity network.

Mike Sievert, Clearwire’s chief commercial officer, capped off a day of panels and discussions on the future of 4G by basically calling BS on most of the things Verizon and AT&T had to say during the day, whether the topic was network speeds, spectral capacity, or just the ability to tell users that an “unlimited” wireless contract meant exactly that: Use all the network you want, as much as you want. “We say, use the service — you’re paying for it, so enjoy it,” said Sievert (left), in a not-so-subtle dig against AT&T and Verizon’s recent public calls for the end to all-you-can-eat pricing.

Sievert’s comments followed similar put-downs from Sprint execs made during their splashy introduction of the HTC EVO 4G, a phone whose networking and video capabilities, if they perform as advertised, put anything else on the market to shame.

After comparing the EVO 4G’s download speeds to a Verizon Droid “and the sub-par network it runs on,” Sprint execs later wowed the fanboy blogging throngs by showing the EVO acting as a Wi-Fi hotspot supplying 4G bandwidth to several devices including an iPhone 3GS, noting that their new toy “can power other smartphones of lesser capability.”

Zang! All this followed Sprint’s saucy make your iPhone 4G ad from the weekend, and a Clearwire press release that detailed how you could use Clearwire’s portable WiMAX/Wi-Fi router to make your new iPad connect in a 4G fashion. How did all this happen? The simple answer is that by combining WiMAX with an unmatched depth of licensed spectrum, Sprint and Clearwire were able to leapfrog the incumbent giants, whose bet on a still-developing technology and some poor network management are now coming home to roost.

While LTE is still a work in progress — even AT&T, which plans to use LTE eventually, slammed Verizon this past weekend for moving too quickly to deploy it — its trailing status doesn’t mean that companies aren’t busy trying to build LTE products as quickly as possible. Over the long run, any oddsmaker in Vegas would still give the edge to AT&T and Verizon, since their sheer size means that any technology they pick — like LTE — will eventually succeed in some fashion, either by performing well or through the brute force of massive marketing campaigns that Sprint and Clearwire can’t match. And while the big incumbents may be spectrum-constrained for the next few years, after that the FCC’s recent plan to free up more wireless airwaves for broadband use should allow them to build a portfolio as big as or bigger than Sprint and Clearwire’s current holdings.

But for the near-term future, you may hear a lot more from Verizon and AT&T about the need to manage networks more efficiently, or about how unlimited contracts are unsustainable. Sprint and Clearwire, meanwhile, will be busy trying to find more ways to load up their network, with no end in sight to their unlimited data, high-speed connection plans. Acting like the bold mouse who isn’t afraid of the elephant, Sievert commented near the end of his talk that when it comes to price and performance value, in the near-term future “I have a hard time imagining our competitors offering what we offer today.”

Double zang! The party here should continue Wednesday, when Sprint CEO Dan Hesse (whose boarder shoes are pictured below) and Clearwire CEO Bill Morrow share the stage for a morning keynote. Expect some more gloating, at the big carriers’ expense. And don’t expect it to stop anytime soon.

(all photos by Paul Kapustka, (c) Sidecut Reports, 2010. Dan Hesse’s shoes, below, by Vans)