[WSJ]: Verizon is Confident its Network Can Support Unlimited Data Plans w/iPhone

Verizon finally launched a CDMA iPhone 4 on its US network on Tuesday (picture from the event). The data plans were not announced but the carrier is expected to offer an unlimited data plan.  

WSJ reports that "Verizon Wireless, the country's largest wireless carrier, is confident enough in its network that it will offer unlimited data-use plans when it starts selling the iPhone around the end of this month, a person familiar with the matter said"

Story by Spencer E. Ante and Yukari Iwatani Kane - See "Verizon Wireless Confident It's Got Muscle for iPhone" - here.

"Such plans would provide a key means of distinguishing its service from rival AT&T Inc., which limits how much Internet data such as videos and photos its customers may use each month"

 

Anthony J. Melone, Verizon's CTO, said Sunday "the company invested heavily in its 3G network last year to handle surging smartphone traffic .. We added enormous capacity to the network in one fell swoop .. It is there waiting for us to grow into it. That will help me tremendously with my 3G network .. Mr. Melone wouldn't comment on how the network would handle the iPhone, but said, "All of this planning can support any successful device."

 

Compare to "AT&T - No More Unlimited Mobile Data" - here.

[WSJ Opinion]: Replace the FCC by Real Choice!

  

Andy Kessler, a former hedge-fund manager and AT&T Bell Labs chip designer and programmer, calls in a Wall Street Journal Opinion column to - "close the Federal Communications Commission. This week, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski gave a speech outlining his push for net neutrality [here], the absurd notion that the Internet should be "open and free" when in fact it's quite expensive to build [here]".

See "Time to Shut Down the FCC" - here.

"Real network neutrality would come from customers dropping a fee-hiking Comcast and taking their business to another provider who can stream high-definition movies [here], TV shows and the next wave of video games. Right now, consumers are stuck with no real options because cable companies continue to bully municipalities to be the sole operator .. In place of the FCC, all we need is a policy framework that states that consumers and innovators have a right to one thing: real choice. Everyone should have the right to choose among many networks for communications services, and no state or municipality may restrict competition.

That's it. Everything else—faster networks, innovative services, a la carte programming, and yes, even privacy—follows from this one rule. Pay a new provider $5 extra a month and no one tracks what websites you visit!"

AT&T Escalates Net Neutrality Political Fight

 
So far carriers claim that traffic management (or DPI) was implemented on their networks in the order to manage network congestion, while the public (and FCC) concerns was that certain OTT services will be discriminated in order to maintain carriers revenues, mainly from voice and video.


Now AT&T is telling the Wall Street Journal (here) that if FCC's Net Neutrality will go through, it will downgrade investment in its U-verse (IPTV over broadband) service offering.

Half a year ago, AT&T announced that the service has 2M subscribers  (see - "AT&T U-verse TV Marks 2 Million Customer Milestone" - here).

Earlier this month we heard from Skype, that their iPhone 3G Skype-to-Skype service will no longer be free so "it [Skype] can fund the investments needed to ensure that the quality of 3G Skype calls stays high" (here).

I was wondering where the money will go to - now I understand that AT&T maybe considering the use of traffic management policies that will prioritize certain services - either their own (U-verse has VoIP as well) or any OTT provider paying it to get reasonable QoS. This creates a conflict with the Net Neutrality no-discrimination principle.

More Signs for Net Neutrality Piece - Google and Verizon Joint Appeal to the FCC

 

After we saw some other signs for agreement between network operators and content providers ("Verizon likes Skype" - here) and doubts about Net Neutrality future ("'Net Neutrality, R.I.P" - here) we get now a joint opnion editorial in WSJ from Eric Schmidt (CEO, Google) and Ivan Seidenberg (CEO, Verizon) (here) where their bottom line is "While our two companies don't agree on every issue, we do agree generally as a matter of policy that the framework of minimal government involvement should continue".

This is referring to Network Neutrality.

After all, they say - ".. the [FCC] plan focuses on increasing access to the highest-quality broadband available. That's a goal both of our companies embrace. It's why Verizon has invested tens of billions of dollars over the past five years to deploy its all-fiber broadband network, and it is why it is rolling out a new high-speed wireless broadband network that can deliver speeds far in excess of many landline networks today. It is also why Google is planning to test a one-gig-per-second broadband network that will provide up to 500,000 people in one or more U.S. communities with ultra-high-speed Internet." [Implying, I believe, to the FCC idea of investing billions of tax payer money on a new public safety network - see "FCC: Public Safety over Broadband Wireless Will Cost $16B" - here ]

It seems that for the relevant parties (not including the customers, of course) it is better to get a compromise now, rather than wait for what the unknown regulation may bring.

WSJ: "The FCC has a new plan but doesn't want a vote"

WSJ Opinion section says today:

"Mr. Genachowski wants more control over broadband providers so that he can implement "net neutrality" rules that would dictate how AT&T, Verizon and other Internet service providers manage their networks. To date, Congress has given the FCC no such authority. Nor has the agency had success in court. Based on oral arguments last month, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals is almost certain to rule against the FCC in a case involving Comcast's network management ... Mr. Genachowski's proposals are meeting resistance from telecom companies and fellow commissioners, which is reason enough to put his broadband plan to an agency vote. Instead, the chairman is urging his colleagues to sign a general statement that endorses the goals of the plan and ignores the details."  

See "Broadband Trojan Horse" (here) .

SO - Can he do it ?