Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

FCC Takes action to promote Interoperability Lower 700 MHz Band

imaginex20 said:
Yay for unlocked phones! If the FCC mandates interoperability on 700 mhz bands the phones must be unlocked...Verizon bought the D block I believe which requires their phones with LTE to be unlocked.
Click to expand...

Yea If I read this right they want to impose the same rules on AT&T's block also.
 
Pretty much, nothing. The average consumer isn't going to notice a thing. Reading through the statement, the following jump out:

1. The FCC is working on a voluntary agreement with carriers, not an imposed or enforced rule change, for an interoperability spat that's been going on since 2009.

Basically: US Cellular and Verizon bought cheap 700Mhz LTE licenses in a portion of frequencies called the "A block," which were sold cheap because there were claims about interference by TV stations in adjacent frequencies, broadcasting on UHF Channel 51. (see #2 below)

AT&T didn't buy up any A block licenses for this reason and instead bought other spectrum (called B and C block). Some of this B/C spectrum they bought directly at auction, but a huge amount of it AT&T got by buying up all kinds of smaller players that bought pieces of this spectrum, gobbling them up and taking ownership of their licenses.

If you really want the details of what blocks go where and all that, you can read up on it here.

Anyway, Verizon and US Cellular got all kinds of tail-hurt that AT&T didn't buy any of this allegedly crummy spectrum, and got even more tail-hurt over how AT&T got so much B and C block bandwidth. So, they've been trying to stick it to AT&T by making the FCC force AT&T to sell only handsets that operate on all three blocks (A, B, and C). This is what's meant by "interoperability."

While I'm not fully versed on the situation, I have a feeling a good deal of this is moot, really. The iPhone 5s and 5c are proof of that. Most chipsets purchased for handsets today do nearly all of these bands.

2. The FCC also determined something everyone already knows: that TV Channel 51 doesn't interfere with LTE and cellular on B and C blocks.

3. They're going to codify some voluntary commitments AT&T made about its 700Mhz spectrum into their licenses. Basically telling AT&T to do whatever it was they already said they were going to do.

All that to basically say, it's business as usual.
 
Last edited:
It won't really matter as verizon continues to roll out AWS on 1700/2100 MHz AWS spectrum. Then they can thumb their nose at the FCC and the rule requiring them to unlock their phones.
 
imaginex20 said:
Yay for unlocked phones! If the FCC mandates interoperability on 700 mhz bands the phones must be unlocked.
Click to expand...

False. For this specific case, this "interoperability" relates to what frequencies the phone could run on, IF unlocked. But it doesn't require them to be unconditionally SIM-unlocked.


Verizon bought the D block I believe which requires their phones with LTE to be unlocked.
Click to expand...

Actually, it's C block spectrum.
 
Last edited:
scaredpoet said:
Pretty much, nothing. The average consumer isn't going to notice a thing. Reading through the statement, the following jump out:

1. The FCC is working on a voluntary agreement with carriers, not an imposed or enforced rule change, for an interoperability spat that's been going on since 2009.

Basically: US Cellular and Verizon bought cheap 700Mhz LTE licenses in a portion of frequencies called the "A block," which were sold cheap because there were claims about interference by TV stations in adjacent frequencies, broadcasting on UHF Channel 51. (see #2 below)

AT&T didn't buy up any A block licenses for this reason and instead bought other spectrum (called B and C block). Some of this B/C spectrum they bought directly at auction, but a huge amount of it AT&T got by buying up all kinds of smaller players that bought pieces of this spectrum, gobbling them up and taking ownership of their licenses.

If you really want the details of what blocks go where and all that, you can read up on it here.

Anyway, Verizon and US Cellular got all kinds of ******** that AT&T didn't buy any of this allegedly crummy spectrum, and got even more ******** over how AT&T got so much B and C block bandwidth. So, they've been trying to stick it to AT&T by making the FCC force AT&T to sell only handsets that operate on all three blocks (A, B, and C). This is what's meant by "interoperability."

While I'm not fully versed on the situation, I have a feeling a good deal of this is moot, really. The iPhone 5s and 5c are proof of that. Most chipsets purchased for handsets today do nearly all of these bands.

2. The FCC also decided that as it turns out, A-Block spectrum isn't so crummy after all, and that TV Channel 51 doesn't interfere with LTE and cellular on those adjacent frequencies, so they're going to resume accepting applications for TV licenses that were frozen about two years ago.

3. They're going to codify some voluntary commitments AT&T made about its 700Mhz spectrum into their licenses. Basically telling AT&T to do whatever it was they already said they were going to do.

All that to basically say, it's business as usual.
Click to expand...

Isn't it great how the government uses working to their advantage. I don't understand why they go the extra mile and say not only does there have to be interoperability but all phones that have the ability to use the A-Block have to comply to A-Block rules thus resulting in unlocked devices. The carriers manipulate the rules all the time, would be nice if the FCC did so in the people's advantage as well.
 
Diseal3 said:
Isn't it great how the government uses working to their advantage. I don't understand why they go the extra mile and say not only does there have to be interoperability but all phones that have the ability to use the A-Block have to comply to A-Block rules thus resulting in unlocked devices. The carriers manipulate the rules all the time, would be nice if the FCC did so in the people's advantage as well.
Click to expand...

The FCC gets lots of influence under the table from the telcos/cablecos and the current head of the FCC is an (supposedly ex-) cableco lobbyist.

The FCC isn't going to make any rulings that really annoy the industry. The carriers do pretty much what they want and Congress isn't going to force them since they want the election campaign money they get from the carriers. (and the under the table money).
 
Diseal3 said:
Isn't it great how the government uses working to their advantage. I don't understand why they go the extra mile and say not only does there have to be interoperability but all phones that have the ability to use the A-Block have to comply to A-Block rules thus resulting in unlocked devices. The carriers manipulate the rules all the time, would be nice if the FCC did so in the people's advantage as well.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, since the second Bush administration, most of the decision makers at the FCC have been former wireless and cable industry executives. There's not a lot of desire to rock the boat. The only reason this ridiculous spat has been going on as long as it has, is because two of the special interest that heavily influence the FCC are fighting against each other.
 
old-wiz said:
The FCC gets lots of influence under the table from the telcos/cablecos and the current head of the FCC is an (supposedly ex-) cableco lobbyist.

The FCC isn't going to make any rulings that really annoy the industry. The carriers do pretty much what they want and Congress isn't going to force them since they want the election campaign money they get from the carriers. (and the under the table money).
Click to expand...

Pretty much spot on.
Would be nice to have some pro-consumer and pro-competition wireless carrier rules that many other countries do but I guess not.
The land of the free....
 
scaredpoet said:
Unfortunately, since the second Bush administration, most of the decision makers at the FCC have been former wireless and cable industry executives. There's not a lot of desire to rock the boat. The only reason this ridiculous spat has been going on as long as it has, is because two of the special interest that heavily influence the FCC are fighting against each other.
Click to expand...

Well if this the general direction (Even if it starts small) that it goes in, I wish more of them turn against each other.
 
Applejuiced said:
Pretty much spot on.
Would be nice to have some pro-consumer and pro-competition wireless carrier rules that many other countries do but I guess not.
The land of the free....
Click to expand...

Like in other countries only the person making the call pays for it. You don't pay to receive a cell call. Here the carriers manage to double charge for every cell call. And the txt message fees are not unreasonable. Or the ability to buy your own phone and pay less. here you pay the same regardless of whether you own the phone or not..and when the phone is paid off, you still pay the same cost, resulting in increase in profit for the carrier.

The carriers/cablecos get good results for the money they funnel to congress/White Hous/FCC.. We have really dirty government.
 
old-wiz said:
Like in other countries only the person making the call pays for it. You don't pay to receive a cell call. Here the carriers manage to double charge for every cell call. And the txt message fees are not unreasonable. Or the ability to buy your own phone and pay less. here you pay the same regardless of whether you own the phone or not..and when the phone is paid off, you still pay the same cost, resulting in increase in profit for the carrier.

The carriers/cablecos get good results for the money they funnel to congress/White Hous/FCC.. We have really dirty government.
Click to expand...

Well said.
Its like sending a letter and the sender pays for the stamp and also the receiver.
Doesn't make any sense. Also the nickel and dime text plan scam now. You either pay for unlimited texting or no texts at all. Nothing in the middle like 200 texts, 1000, etc....
Its a shame how bad they're finding ways to take advantage of people and they get away with anything they want.
 
I agree. Unfortunately, when the bells were broken up it was when wireless technology was becoming a possibility. They just slowly rebuilt themselves in a different (and new) telecom market being able to make the rules and setting the precedent's and nobody would know the difference.

I think it's time for another breakup. Today, phone's shouldn't be entering the realm of car payments.

The excuse of MVNO's do no suffice as they are just using the big 4's networks in some way ultimately displaying the power the big 4 have over the country.

But like you said Old-Wiz, the government is now to corrupt in getting to many payouts they wont even think about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back