Today, Ultra-wideband chip makers Artimi and Staccato Communications announced $20 million in funding and a merger agreement, which seems like tying two leaky boats together, giving them some more gas and hoping they make it to shore. The combination of Artimi and Staccato brings together the two UWB companies that were rumored to be running out of cash (as most of the other players had received cash earlier this year).
I have my doubts about the future of UWB, the high-speed personal area networking technology, after the closure of UWB chipmaker WiQuest, the bankruptcy of UWB chip firm Focus Enhancements and the halt of Intel’s UWB research program, but belief in UWB apparently remains high. Alereon CEO Eric Broockman, earlier this month, told me he believed that cell phones might be the eventual killer application for UWB, as people could use it for high-speed data transfers without sucking up a lot of power. He pointed out that SK Telecom, which had invested in Alereon this year showed a prototype handset with UWB chips inside. Maybe there is hope, but I’m not betting on those boats reaching the shore.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Five years ago, the promise of a new networking technology known as Ultra-wideband was a living room without wires, where DVD players, set-top boxes and video accessories could connect with TVs over the air. Ultra-wideband (UWB) is a wireless personal area networking technology that can transmit large amounts of data for short distances using very little power. Over time, its promise expanded from the living room to the home office, as backers used Ultra-wideband as the basis for Wireless USB and the WiMedia standard.
So far, this dream hasn’t materialized, and the technology has failed to find a mass market. Today, we still have wires in both the office and living room, and a host of competing standards have whittled away UWB’s opportunity. In the last week, we’ve seen players exit the UWB business, and Intel announced that it has halted research on the technology. For venture firms who have invested nearly $400 million in the space, the fate of Ultra-wideband offers a cautionary tale about the perils of betting on semiconductor standards.
On Oct. 31, five-year-old UWB chipmaker WiQuest shut its doors when it was unable to raise more money or find a buyer for its technology. That led to heralds of doom for Ultra-wideband, with analysts and media blaming long-delayed product launches, expensive chips and a hostile regulatory environment. This week, Intel said it had discontinued its UWB efforts, saying the market wasn’t worth its R&D efforts. If the technology somehow manages to revive, Intel says it could buy up one of the six remaining startups in the space.
The plan makes sense for Intel because UWB, like Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and WiMAX, is a standardized technology. That means any UWB chipmaker will have the basic set of characteristics Intel needs to play in the market. Standards are a double-edged sword for venture investors. On one hand they are good for consumers and electronics makers because they enable multiple devices from different vendors to work together. Any Wi-Fi router should talk to any Wi-Fi chip in a computer, phone or camera. This helps drive consumer adoption and can lead to the creation of a huge market. Venture capital firms love this, because if a standard takes off it can build a company like Broadcom or Atheros that can generate rapid returns in a relatively short amount of time.
The other edge of that sword is that chipmakers who adhere to the standard can do little to differentiate their chips, which makes it easy to switch vendors and effectively commoditizes the product. This happened for the Wi-Fi standard back in 2000-2002, when venture firms put more than $2 billion into more than 40 Wi-Fi companies, only to see a few rise to the top. There is also the risk, inherent in all technologies, that the market won’t adopt it. This seems to be what’s happening for UWB.
Instead of seeing the technology completely die out, Eric Broockman, CEO of UWB chipmaker Alereon, argues that Intel’s retreat from the technology and WiQuest’s failure mean a shakeup similar to that experienced by the Wi-Fi market is happening with UWB. “Typically in this type of semiconductor investing there is a win-place-show mentality,” Broockman says. “One wins big, one gets acquired for a good price, one gets acquired for a not-so-good price, and everyone else goes away. That process in UWB is being accelerated by the current economic downturn.”
There were at least seven UWB chipset companies formed in the 2003 time frame. Now, many appear close to failure. WiQuest, which raised about $54 million, was one. Two others, Artimi and Staccato Communications, are both rumored to be running out of cash. Artimi has raised $31.5 million and couldn’t be reached for comment for this story. Intel Capital invested in Staccato when it was pushing UWB. That could position Staccato to end up being the company in the show category, because Intel might buy it for its intellectual property at a cheap price down the road.
Fighting for the win and place spots are Alereon, which has raised more than $70 million with a small amount coming earlier this year from SKTelecom; TZero, which raised $18 million in March led by CID Group; and Wisair, which raised $24 million in February led by Susquehanna Growth Equity. Radiospire is another player in the UWB market, but it appears to be shifting gears — or at least hedging its bets — by also making chips for transferring wireless HD video using a different standard.
Competeing standards are one of the reasons UWB is having such a hard time finding a toehold. For desktop personal area networking, Bluetooth and Wi-Fi are becoming more prominent — and have the benefit of cheaper chips. In video, UWB has conceded to Wi-Fi and specialized standards such as Wireless HD and WHDI. Those left on the playing field are quick to point out that UWB still has legs — and it might, if it finds the type of killer application that can drive adoption rates and increase chip sales to the point where they cost less to embed. But the shakeup happening here proves that chip investment isn’t for the faint of heart.
This article also appeared on BusinessWeek.com

The Conference for Video Entrepreneurs and Influencers (at special $450 rate)
Meet the creators of Heroes and CSI, the CEOs of Hulu and Netflix, and the digital VPs of ABC and FOX.
Globalstar, a Miliptas, Calif.-based satellite services provider, has received permission from the Federal Communications Commission to offer wireless WiMAX services using its spectrum. Earlier this year I wrote about Denver-based Open Range Communications, which got a hefty $267 million loan from the USDA to promote broadband in the boonies. They had a deal with Globalstar to use satellite maker’s Ancillary Terrestrial Component authority. That little deal needed the FCC’s blessing and now that that has happened, the two partners can go ahead and start selling broadband to about 500 rural communities.
Open Range is still keeping a low profile. All you can tell about the company is that they have access to $105 million in private equity. Bill Beans Jr., a veteran of the CLEC business, is the CEO of this company, while Gregory Slemons, formerly chief network officer at AT&T Wireless, is the chief operating officer. The plan is to sell 1.5 Mbps connection for $40 a month and unlimited voice for about $30 a month. When the service will go live– that is anybody’s guess.

UPDATED With Comments From Sprint: Cogent Communications, one of the largest bandwidth providers in the world, charged that Sprint-Nextel has severed its network from Cogent’s networks. This could cause network slowdown and decrease in web performance. In a statement today, the company said that Sprint unpeered from Cogent’s network at 4:30 p.m. on October 31 30, 2008. Peering is a voluntary process where two networks exchange equal amount of data amongst each other without actually paying each other.
“It is no longer possible for many Sprint customers and Cogent customers to directly communicate across the Internet,” Cogent said, and alleged that Sprint was in “violation of a contractual obligation to exchange Internet traffic with Cogent on a settlement free peering basis.” The two companies are in litigation over the issue.
I will try and talk to both companies in the morning, but I just wonder if Sprint is the only party to blame here. Cogent, based in Washington, D.C., has been involved in similar unpeering spats with Level 3, Telia and other operators.
Update: Here is a response from Sprint that shows that the situation isn’t as simple as Cogent tries to paint it. ”In 2006, Sprint and Cogent entered into a commercial trial agreement. Cogent failed to satisfy Sprint’s peering criteria and refused to pay Sprint to stay connected to our network. Sprint notified Cogent well in advance that it would disconnect Cogent unless it paid, and Cogent refused. As a result of Cogent’s refusal, Sprint was forced to terminate the commercial interconnection agreement and disconnect its network from Cogent’s.”
The Sprint spokesperson said that, “Cogent’s posturing in this case is nothing more than an effort to divert attention away from its’ contractual obligations, and this is the latest in a growing list of peering-related disputes between Cogent and Internet backbone providers.”
In the past, these problems have arisen because one of the two network operators felt that they needed to be compensated for the the traffic they were sending to the other. Cogent CEO Dave Schaffer in an interview earlier this year said that carriers hate them because they don’t like “our low-price pricing policy except our customers, and most of the companies have been reluctant peers with us.”
Cogent says that any “Sprint-Nextel wireline customer that is unable to connect to Cogent’s customers a free 100 megabit per second connection to the Internet for as long as Sprint continues to keep this partitioning of the Internet in place.”


The Conference for Video Entrepreneurs and Influencers (at special $450 rate)
Meet the creators of Heroes and CSI, the CEOs of Hulu and Netflix, and the digital VPs of ABC and FOX.
When it comes to the next generation of wireless broadband, the carriers seem to have the Long Term Evolution standard, or LTE, all sewn up, but the competing 4G service WiMAX is nothing to scoff at. WiMAX service, deployed in the U.S. by Sprint and 13 rural carriers, is gaining ground in other areas of the world, especially India, according to data published today by TeleGeography Research.
The research firm said the number of commercial WiMAX networks worldwide grew 82 percent — to 126 from 69 — between the third quarter of 2007 and the same period this year. For rural access, WiMAX is a technology that can replace existing low-speed modems and satellite broadband communications, making it popular in developing countries. Even in the U.S., carriers such as FairPoint Communications, which said today it would deploy a WiMAX network in New England for rural access, and AT&T are eying the technology as a cheaper alternative to laying fiber or more copper. So WiMAX may not be living up to its earlier hype as the dominant wireless broadband technology, but it’s still a market with legs.

chart courtesy of TeleGeography Research

A UK consumer group has found that 1 million British broadband users have come close to exceeding, or have exceeded, their ISP’s broadband caps, according to the BBC. The group, uSwitch, also found that five of the nine Internet service providers that advertised “unlimited” access actually had caps, and were prepared to disconnect users who violated them. Only two out of the nine providers actually disclosed their caps (which were 30 GB and 40 GB per month), leaving 80 percent of Internet users unaware of limitations on their data downloads.
Here in the U.S., broadband caps are becoming more prevalent with Comcast disclosing a 250 GB per month cap, all the way down to Frontier Communications mandating a minuscule 5 GB per month cap. There are also 5 GB per month limits on just about all “unlimited” wireless broadband plans. We’re pretty vehemently against broadband caps, which we see as a threat to innovation. But they’re even more damaging when people don’t know what those caps are. Concealing such language in the terms of service or fine print, while advertising access as unlimited should violate truth-in-advertising laws. It also makes consumers angry when they discover, through practice or through reading sites such as this one, that they’ve bought into a lie.

Someone recently pointed out to me that “a crisis is the ultimate teachable moment.” Startup founders have long known this. Whether you find yourself dealing with a sudden lack of access to commercial loans, the collapse of a funding round, a management change, or even a failed product, you can help yourself work through such unpredictable — yet probably inevitable — business challenges by being prepared in advance with a response plan. One of the most important areas of your preparation, but one that is often overlooked, is your communications plan.
Maintaining clear and consistent communication with your staff, investors, customers and your partners can make all the difference to the success or failure of business in crisis, says Wendy Lane. She is founder of the public relations and marketing firm Lane PR based in Portland, Ore. Over the years Lane has helped clients, cope with all kinds of crises: from bankruptcies, to public political snafus, and in once case, a violent tragedy at a place of business. (Believe me, this sort of crisis puts the stock market turmoil into perspective, fast).
The point is, a crisis is a crisis because it creates uncertainty. You cannot predict exactly who you’re going to need help from in a pinch – employees or lenders, or both? People you thought you could rely on will surprise you in positive and negative ways. This is why keeping healthy lines of communication open with all of your constituencies is so important. Naturally you should do this as a matter of course in your daily business, but in the end, says Lane, “Good crisis communications is about transparency, transparency, transparency.”
Lane’s firm has a crisis management plan for its clients. She offered to share it. Here are some takeaways:
1. Identify risk areas of your business that could lead to an internal crisis, or be compounded by an external one. You’ve already done this with your business model, now think about how your risk area could be compounded by exposure to customers or the media. Risk areas to consider: death or serious illness of a senior executive; serious on-the-job injury; technical challenges; natural disaster; security breach.
2. Create a crisis management team and have a senior executive it. Appoint an internal communicator to support employee communication activities. Select an external communicator, to deal with outside parties like media or retail customers. (If you have one, this is your PR counsel.) Deal with investors. If you cannot take it on, appoint another senior staffer to deal with partners. Just make sure no constituency is getting communication from more than one person – consistency is important.
3. Develop a call list. Sounds like a call tree, but do it. You have no idea how much it will help you in a panic to have previously prioritized who among your senior staff, or your board, needs to be contacted, and in what order. Contacts for every member of your crisis management team should also be on the call list.
4. Develop your message. Do not do this in a vacuum. Use your crisis management team to help you. Any outside adviser you enlist for help (a lawyer, etc.) is now de facto part of your crisis communications team. Choose carefully.
5. Notify your constituencies in a concerted effort. Tell non executive-employees collectively about your crisis in order to dispel rumors and speculation. Call a staff meeting, send a broadcast e-mail or voice mail. Do not communicate piecemeal. Be candid. Deliver updates as information is available.
6. Assume that any information you share with employees, partners, investors, etc. could be communicated to the media or outside parties.

management
Communications
pr
startups
crisis
Lane
Technology-News
xml
Web2.0
webdevelopment
Specification
Markup
Communications
OASIS