Category Archives: UTOPIA

Voonami Offering Virtual Desktop Service on UTOPIA

By | | ,
Leave a comment

Voonami shot out a press release today announcing that they are now offering virtual desktops over UTOPIA. Basically, you have a remote desktop session on one of their servers with all of your data and applications which can then be accessed with almost any client. This is the holy grail of cloud services and is only really feasible when you have a high-bandwidth connection on both ends. UTOPIA is a great platform for pushing these kinds of next-generation services and I’m always excited to see something outside of the normal voice/video/data offerings.

UTOPIA Signs Telesphere as a New Service Provider

By | | , ,
Leave a comment

You heard it here first: UTOPIA has signed a deal with Telesphere to offer business voice and data services. Telesphere specializes in hosted PBX solutions, a nice differentiation between traditional SIP trunks or ATAs sold by most other providers, and has additional presence in Las Vegas, Phoenix, and Denver. These kinds of managed services are a great match for UTOPIA’s network and help to go beyond the standard triple-play.

I’ve also heard that over the coming months, UTOPIA will be announcing a number of other new providers and large partnerships, some of which will result in substantive revenue gains and extension of the reach of the network. When something happens, you’ll probably read it here first.

UTOPIA Applications for Broadband Stimulus Rejected in Round 1

By | | ,
12 Comments

The NTIA has started sending out rejection notices to broadband stimulus applicants and has been updating its online database with hundreds of applicants that did not get approved in the first round. Among those are all three of UTOPIA’s applications. Despite rejection in Round 1, UTOPIA can still apply for Round 2 which will be less restrictive on application requirements.

That said, it’s entirely possible (and in my estimation, highly probable) that UTOPIA won’t get funding at all. BTOP seems to be focused on new projects rather than existing ones and is focusing on the most rural areas. If that’s the case, the SAA will be the only way to finance any future construction and participants will have to bear a higher cost.

(h/t: Stimulating Broadband)

The SAA: Is Centerville Next?

By | |
1 Comment

A commenter asked about the future of UTOPIA in Centerville and a search of the city website turned up some hints from the city council meeting on January 5. According to those minutes, Centerville is considering a Special Assessment Area (SAA) to cover the city with service, but the city council hasn’t yet taken any official action. (There was also discussion of making the Mayor the new board member for the city, but no action was taken on that either.) If you’re one of the people who has been waiting, patiently or not, for UTOPIA service, your chance may come soon.

UTOPIA Launches Updated Website, Adds New Provider

By | |
4 Comments

Looks like UTOPIA has finally launched a new website. It looks a lot better than the old one and appears to include a way to see where service is available, though that feature is currently down. It’s definitely a marked improvement over the old one.

The service provider list also shows that Voonami is now a commercial service provider on the network, bringing the total up to 9 companies providing service. The board meeting schedule for 2010 has also been posted. Go give it a poke and see if you find anything else interesting.

(h/t: luminous)

UTA Threatening to Sue UTOPIA and Brigham City

By | | ,
10 Comments

Hot off of their misinformation campaign to residents, the Utah Taxpayers Association is now rattling their legal sabers at UTOPIA and Brigham City over the Special Assessment Area (SAA). The UTA is claiming that participants were deprived of due process because the terms were not explained properly and that there wasn’t a public hearing. These claims, however, are a matter of pure fiction. Many of the comments I’ve read indicate that the terms were explained and paper copies of the agreement provided via mail by the city. The initial meeting held in November to form the SAA was a public hearing and was well-attended.

What’s interesting, however, is that it was Qwest that initially filed FOIA requests with Brigham City to see the terms of the SAA, yet the UTA is the one making legal threats. My suspicion is that, after getting their butts kicked in court, Qwest wants to use the UTA as their proxy in these fights. The UTA refuses to disclose how much money individual members contribute or what influence any members exercise, ironic considering that they are protesting that there hasn’t been enough sunshine in the process.

The most galling part isn’t the lying and misrepresentation. At this point, it appears to be par for the course. No, what irks me the most is the UTA characterization of Brigham City residents as simple-minded fools just waiting to be duped by the first slick salesman that appears on their doorstep. I’ve met many residents and city employees from Brigham and I can tell you with complete certainty that they’re no dummies. They go to city council meetings, read the papers, and get informed on issues in a way that I wish their urban counterparts would consider trying out. (Seriously, I’ve found rural voters to be some of the sharpest tacks out there, especially when it comes to local politics.) How the UTA thinks it can simultaneously insult the intelligence of and purport to represent taxpayers is beyond me.

Some Thoughts on the Future of the SAA

By | | ,
3 Comments

Now that the SAA has been approved in Brigham City and construction can start, we can expect that the same model will be executed in other member cities to help build out the infrastructure. Even neighborhoods not in member cities could get in on the action if they were so inclined. Even with how successful it was overall, I still have some reservations.

Continue reading →

Articles on the Brigham City SAA Vote

By | | ,
13 Comments

The Salt Lake Tribune, Deseret News, and Standard-Examiner all have posted their articles on last night’s vote in Brigham City. According to the Trib, only about 70 of the over 1600 participants in the SAA opted to sign the UTA petition seeking to leave the SAA, a scant 4%. One of them admitted to not even reading the contract before signing up despite having been given the opportunity to do so. (There’s one in every crowd, you know?) Unsurprisingly, Ruth Jensen was the lone vote against it and tried several times to delay the meeting.

Brigham City will issue a bond for $3.66M (rated A3 by Moody’s or low risk) and chip in $655K of city money of which either $294K or $482K will be to wire city facilities, depending on which article is correct. The remainder of the $5.45M total construction cost comes from residents who chose to pay up-front. That works out to over 400 residents who opted to front the construction cost, over a quarter of the total participants. A pleasant surprise is that the cost of the SAA went down to $22.50 per participating residence.

From there, there’s a lot of divergence in the details of the articles. The Tribune article takes a decidedly negative slant in line with their recent editorial. The Deseret News claims that 600 participants in the SAA won’t get service because of low participation rates, a claim that doesn’t jive with the other articles at all.

BREAKING: Brigham City Approves UTOPIA SAA

By | | , ,
Leave a comment

Despite some recent controversy created by the UTA and saber-rattling by Qwest’s legal team, Brigham City has signed off on the UTOPIA SAA and cleared the way to start construction immediately. This will add 1,604 customers to the network and opens the way for additional customers to join the network at a later time. The network will cover the entire city and be available to every residence and business. No word yet on when the construction will be complete, but there is a rush to get it done before the ground freezes.

Brigham City Responds to UTA FUD

By | | ,
2 Comments

Brigham City has posted a thorough rebuttal (warning: PDF) of UTA’s false and misleading mailer sent to residents earlier this week. (h/t: Paul Larsen) It thoroughly shreds the UTA’s positions which are about the same as claiming that dihydrogen monoxide is a dangerous substance. Many of them are the same rebuttal points I offered, some are new or provide additional specifics I did not have. It proved that UTA is, once again, making stuff up to derail UTOPIA while saying they’re looking out for taxpayers. If they really cared about taxpayers, they would stop trying to derail the project and make residents in the member cities pay higher taxes.