Is Super WiFi Really Super if it's not WiFi?

I wish I was more clever; this should be a rant as memorable as “Who’s on First”. Unfortunately, it’s not. Why? FI, aka Fixed Infrastructure, is like a lecture at the plumber’s union. Probably touches all of us, but in the end, only a few need to know.

However, assuming you are on the need-to-know list, what term should be used to discuss the spectrum formerly known as Analog TV?

According to Wikipedia, “In the United States, the abandoned television frequencies are primarily in the upper UHF “700-megahertz” band, covering TV channels 52 to 69 (698 to 806 MHz). U.S. television and its white spaces will continue to exist in UHF frequencies, as well as VHF frequencies for which mobile users and white-space devices require larger antennas.”

And so we begin with the first problem – the term white spaces (which is the way I looked it up on Google and Wikipedia), and White Space used synonymously

If you look up White Space on Google you get “About 84,100,000 results”, mostly about the web and general layout. White Space is a term commonly used in media and hence not a spectrum term. However, to be clear the term White Space was a visualization of the gap in spectrum currently being used. 

The point being, years ago we thought we needed that frequency gap to keep the channels from interfering with each other and now we don’t.

Wireless technology continues to improve in efficiency and as Martin Cooper has declared, “the ability to transmit different radio communications at one time and in the same place has grown with the same pace since Guglielmo Marconi's first transmissions in 1895. The number of such communications being theoretically possible has doubled every 30 months, from then, for 104 years. This fact has been dubbed Cooper's Law.”

However, borrowing the term White Spaces generates on Google “About 11,100,000 results”, some of which are ambiguous efforts to determine if you are looking for White Space Spectrum or White Space (This is where Costello would mimic Abbot and say, “I don’t know; Third Base”).

If you are Chairman Julius Genachowski, the answer is Super WiFi, which generates “About 331,000,000 results”, mostly because of the term WiFi being associated with it. 

Clearly, politically the term has value. And in comparison to WiFi, the increase in range for the base stations is considerable, so technically comparing it to WiFi it lives up to hype.

However, the use of this spectrum is not a home based system unless your home is JR’s Southfork in “Dallas”. White Spaces are not being developed for home based systems yet. 

It’s therefore a service provider’s world. And service providers hate the term WiFi because people expect that the solution is a product and not a service.

So the Super WiFi term is problematic. Our event, called the Super WiFi Summit, gets “About 3,560,000 results”. (We are looking forward to the number of URLs foreshadowing the number of conference attendees).

White Spaces seems to be the best name available until the technology is adopted and stands out on its own. And eventually it will. I personally believe that it will become known for self-organizing networks that use Skype-like connectivity to make cooperative solutions. Many friends in the business sector have tried to enable these kinds of solutions with existing technology and failed. 

Our friend Brough Turner sees a path where WiFi can do this on its own and be its own Super WiFi

Alternatively, it may be the use of the database look up systems that make it so that cognitive systems are the important feature. 

The bottom line is we will continue to call our event the Super WiFi summit, and we will refer to the spectrum use as White Spaces.

Frankly, if you don’t care, grab your catcher’s glove. You’re in the game.