1. Privacy for those who want it. Many family members were concerned about privacy, and although there were never any incidents that I heard about, I want to keep living individuals information private except to those who are authorized.
2. Collaboration so everyone can add to the family tree. I’ll be honest the tree is at least a decade out of date. I no longer have the time to add hundreds of new names monthly, but if everyone just added their family and their cousins it could be rebuilt in no time.
3. Integration with other software. This website is now written with WordPress, it’s easy and fast, but the family tree needs to integrate with WordPress, Facebook and other social media sites. The big issue is if you want to edit the family tree or different parts of the website you should have just one user/password. Last time the site had multiple user/passwords and it was very difficult to manage.
4. Finally it has to be easy to use.

Now for those of you who are looking for a Bilodeau Family Tree right now Jean-Claude Bilodeau has the biggest one I know. It’s in French and not very user friendly but here it is.

If any one knows of any good examples of a quality working family tree site, please let me know in the comments.

Thanks

For those of you who wandered in from the Internets, I apologize, I have been neglectful in watching over my site.

I’ve been wondering what to do with bilodeau.org. As a family history site, it’s very limited. Really how many posts can I do on Alex and Jean-Luc?

I want to keep it more current and useful for visitors, and to that end I am going to expand the sight to encompass some other professional  interests like e-learning and cutting edge technologies, maybe even some predictions on future technologies.

I hope to post new topics two or three times a week, and bring back some energy to this site.

Thank You.

The conclusion of this study seeks to summarize the results so far and answer as to the feasibility of the proposed plan for community owned high speed wireless broadband companies. Each individual study produced for this paper showed positive results to answer this question, and each report generated should help to facilitate the development of community owned broadband communications companies in the St. Paul Region.

The marketing research survey produced likely the most surprising results of the study. The Alberta Rural Broadband Status Report suggested a disinterest of community members to become involved in the development of broadband in rural communities. This survey, if anything, showed just the opposite. Not only are community members interested in the development of broadband in their communities, but they are already deeply involved in the content of the internet – be it socializing on Facebook or researching on Wikipedia for school or work.

The technical survey showed that the opportunity is there to create the necessary infrastructure without significant difficulty or interference. It proved that the most effective means of delivering high speed wireless broadband access to community members was through broadcast towers operating on the 900 MHz frequency spectrum.

Finally, the Outreach Education Trials proved that the opportunity is there for mass E-Learning throughout rural Alberta once the broadband infrastructure is strong enough to support it. This represents the most significant potential benefit to Alberta’s future with the deployment of broadband service.

In addition to the conducted studies, it is hoped that this paper could contribute practical support to the development of community owned broadband companies throughout rural Alberta, and especially in the First Nations communities of the St. Paul region. The marketing plan in combination with the business plan outline should enable companies to begin planning expansion in their communities and generating interest with their customers. The companies themselves are in a unique position, operating more as a community service than a community business, and using this to their advantage to develop their customer base should allow them to be successful in achieving their goals.

Following this conclusion are recommendations in light of this feasibility study for the Alberta government by which to continue developing rural broadband in these communities and potentially in all small communities throughout Alberta. There is no question remaining – not only is community-owned high speed wireless broadband feasible in these communities, it is optimal and demanded by community members.

After examining all of the frequency bandwidths and appraisals, it would be best to go with the Kinusoo broadband development plan using 900 MHz, than the network plan of other companies using the 2.4 GHz and 5.8 GHz ranges. The specific reason for this is all of the frequency bandwidths are open, and there is no need to go into the 5.8 GHz range which can more easily interfered with by weather anomalies such as rain or heavy snow. The almost completely empty 900 MHz range means 900 MHz antennas would be more than satisfactory to run broadband to all of these locations. Many large hills and high buildings could be used as bay stations, particularly the community centres where the point of presence will be done. 50 foot push-up towers or push-up posts that could get above the tree line would be required to get transmission to residential owners. The only location where any interference would be found in the 2.4 GHz range for routers would be the centralized location where the community centre and schools are in close proximity. Due to sparse populations and distances between housing, wireless broadband in the 2.4 GHz range should not interfere house to house.

The mounting assets should be clear of trees if possible. In addition, mesh nodes should be installed on mounting assets that are located ideally at the top of hills on towers away from interference. This makes best use of the mesh node for covering larger areas. It is important to not use towers or buildings that are higher than the structures surrounding them. This avoids existing wireless LAN signals and RF noise from impacting the operation of the node and the users it supports.

The location of gateways and backhaul components should be installed on towers offering unobstructed line of sight with the relay point. The designer of the community‐wide Wi‐Fi network should take into consideration all tower sites, tree lines homes that the area has access to when selecting backhaul points.

As for the equation referenced above that would more easily calculate the penetration of broadband in a rural community, further surveys in urban centres and different rural communities would need to be established. Preliminary studies seem to be a strong correlation between the number of Wi-Fi access points and the number of users with high-speed internet.

This section presents a series of maps and charts which estimate the usage of the unlicensed frequencies across sections of northern Alberta. While there are several small companies listed as supplying wireless signals across these areas, this survey is going to show most of these companies are very limit in scope and quality of signal and there is a great deal of open bandwidth in every location for additional spectrum allocation of a community wireless supplier.

Technical survey objectives were to go to each of the rural communities in question and measure the frequency traffic on all of the open unlicensed frequencies. These maps are based on a set of over 250 reading and data points, collected across the second week of April 2010.[1] These samples were recorded by a team of technicians using specialized computer spectrum analyzers and global positioning systems. This data offers a basis for determining the impact of existing signals on the operation of a community-wide Wi‐Fi network. In many places, because of road conditions it was not possible to collect samples; we have extrapolated coverage areas from nearby data points and detailed maps of the terrain.

Spectrum scans were collected using a spectrum analyzer to measure signal activity in the 900 megahertz (MHz), 2.4‐2.5 and 5‐6 gigahertz (GHz) frequency bands at various locations throughout the survey area. Numerous spectrum scans were performed at ground level using an Wi-Spy 900x® Spectrum Analyzer and the Wi-Spy DBx® Spectrum Analyzer inserted into a laptop running Chanalyzer analysis software. This spectrum analyzer used an external omni‐directional antenna. The software automatically captured a spectrum scan at rapid intervals while the survey team drove throughout the survey area. The software plotted the location of each spectrum scan on a map based on coordinates obtained through a global positioning system (GPS) with an external antenna for better position accuracy. The systems recorded a log of the frequencies in question during the runs. Each community was driven through by a team of two people, one navigating, and one managing the hardware for any flaws and noting any inter esting anomalies that might require further investigation. The entire process for all six locations took approximately three days. Most roads were in relatively good condition, some roads had to be bypassed or worked around due to unmanageable conditions. 80-90% of the locations with habitation were scanned.

The wireless LAN scans were done through the use of Alfa Long Range Wi-Fi Network Scanner interfaced with the inSSIDer survey software and a GPS device. The software automatically recorded the SSID (Service Set Identifier), RF channel setting, signal strength and noise levels of wireless LAN access points while the survey team drove throughout the survey area in half mile increments. This provides a sample of the wireless LANs active within the survey area and also examines particularly the 2.4 GHz range for home-based wireless or wi-fi routers. This better gauges the number of homes or structures that could be currently running broadband internet, and may help in designing an equation that would better allow municipal planners to judge the number of homes in their areas that have acquired broadband connections.

The existing signal levels shown in the spectrum images and wireless LAN scans suggest a limited level of noise impact to an additional Wi‐Fi network. These existing signals are emanating from wireless LANs and other radio equipment currently operating throughout the communities.

In most cases, the average signal levels were below ‐85dBm at ground level throughout the survey area in the unlicensed bands. This only provides a rough indication of existing signal activity within the survey area, but it offers an initial basis for assessing the impact on the deployment of a Wi‐Fi system. This consistent average noise does not pose significant potential problems to the use of these frequencies for supporting mesh nodes at ground level within the areas.

Cold Lake by far had the most traffic in the 900 MHz range, as Kinusoo Communications Ltd. uses 900 MHz to transmit their wireless broadband to their communities. Cold Lake had the greatest number of 2.4 GHz wireless Wi-Fi home routers. Not only was there a higher density of wireless routers around the central community area, wireless routers were found throughout the community. 5.8 GHz ranges were effectively completely empty and despite the 900 MHz range being quite busy, there was still more than ample amounts of room to fit additional 900 MHz signals if necessary.

All other locations were effectively the same. 900 MHz across all the reservations had effectively one weak 900 MHz signal. This signal could not be tracked to a source. Speculation is it is some sort of cellular transmission by the cell phone companies or a 900 MHz antenna some distance away. Each of these signals was generally in the same location and was found to be extremely weak and small in number. The 900 MHz in all reserves were left open. All the communities had more than enough space to put additional channels in the 900 MHz band.

The 2.4 GHz section, the location where residential Wi-Fi could be found, remained consistent across all five locations – strongly concentrated in the area around the community centre. There were 4-6 locations where the SuperNet point of presence was; after that very few Wi-Fi signals could be found on any of the sites. Those that were there were diffused throughout the locations to the point that all of the sites showed little activity on any of the frequency bands.[2] The only exception was White Fish Lake with some traffic in the 5.8 GHz band. This traffic may have been used for tower repeaters or some other communications equipment that could not be found and signals remained weak.

Northern Alberta is relativity flat which will help in the placement of wireless signals to attain distance; however, these locations are heavily treed and this can cause interference issues with the high GHz frequencies. Despite the fact that less bandwidth can be utilized in the lower 900 MHz, the 900 MHz frequency can more efficiently pass through obstacles like trees and it should be used.

The Alberta SuperNet has already laid the foundation for providing fast and effective internet access to rural communities. However, what is now required, is a solution to provide rural community members with what is referred to as a “last mile” infrastructure, enabling them to receive broadband signals into their homes. This infrastructure is the responsibility of internet service providers and communication companies in the particular communities. Since this report is directed to the development of community owned communication companies, the type of last mile infrastructure put into place is of critical importance to this document.

There are a number of options to solving this particular problem, such as offering direct fibre optic connection to the home but for the communities in question, the best and most consistent option is wireless technology.  This is true for many reasons – including cost, ease of use, and ease of installation, without significant sacrifice to quality of service and speed. The technical survey strongly supports an unlicensed wireless solution running on the 900 MHz band.[1]

A SWOT Analysis is a strategic planning model used by businesses and academia to provide a foundation for calculated decision-making. It attempts to look at a situation both positively and negatively from a position both internal and external to the company. To that end, as noted, it summarizes a company’s internal strengths and weaknesses, as well as the opportunities and threats that external conditions present. The goal of a SWOT analysis and the reason to outline this is that a company ideally should bolster its strengths, take advantage of its opportunities, cover its weaknesses, and mitigate potential threats. For the sake of clarity, SWOT Analyses often also include summary charts in point-form.

The SWOT analysis will be different for each community, but the examples above provide a look at the conditions each may face. It is critically important to be upfront about all conditions facing the company, especially its internal weaknesses and external threats, in order to be best prepared and mitigate the overall risk of the venture.

The following survey was distributed to households in the St. Paul Region in order to help access the community’s overall needs and interest in the program outlined.

Demographic Questions

1. What is your age range?

< 20, 20-24, 25-34, 35-44, 45-54, 55-59, 60-64, > 65

2. What is your gender?

Male, Female

3. What is your marital status?

Single, Common-Law, Married, Divorce

4. Do you have children living at home?

Yes, No

i) If yes, how old are the children?

< 5, 5-12, 13-17, > 18

5. How many people do you have living at your home?

1, 2, 3-5, > 5

6. What is your personal income level?

< $10000, $10000-$19999, $20000-$29999, $30000-$39999, $40000-$49999, $50000-$69999, $70000-$99990, > $100000

7. What is your household income level?

< $19999, $20000-$29999, $30000-$39999, $40000-$49999, $50000-$69999, $70000-$99999, > $100000

8. Has your household income changed in the past five years?

Increased, Decreased, Remained the Same

9. What is the highest level of education you’ve completed?

Less than High School, High School / GED, Some College / University, College / University Certificate, 4-Year Degree Program, Master’s Degree, Doctoral Degree, Other (Please Specify)

10. Which Band do you belong to?

Technology Questions

11. When did you last use a computer?

Never Used, Within the Past Day, Within the Past Week, Within the Past Month, Within the Past Year, More than a Year Ago

12. Do you have a computer at home?

Yes, No

13. If yes, do you have access to the internet from your computer?

Yes, No

i ) What is the name of the company that provides your internet service?

ii) How would you describe your current internet service?

Dial-Up, Cable, DSL, Satellite, Other

iii) How would you describe the quality of your internet service regarding speed of connection?

Superior – Exceeds my Needs, Adequate – Meets my Needs, Inadequate – Does Not Meet my Needs

iv) How would you describe the quality of your internet service regarding customer service and technical support?

Superior, Adequate, Inadequate

v) How much are you paying per month for access to the internet?

Under $20, $20-$40, $41-60, $61-%80, More than $80

14. How important is internet access to you?

Very Important, Somewhat Important, Not Important, No Opinion

15. How important is internet access to other members of your household?

Very Important, Somewhat Important, Not Important, No Opinion

16. If you had the opportunity, would you increase your access to the internet?

Yes, No

17. If you do not subscribe to a high-speed internet service or any internet service at all, what are your reasons?

18. Do you have any concerns about internet access in your community? Security and privacy? Content?

19. If you had access to affordable, secure high-speed internet access in your community, would you subscribe to it?

Very Likely, Somewhat Likely, Not Likely

20. How frequently do you use a computer?

Often (Daily-Several Times Weekly), Sometimes (Weekly-A Few Times Monthly), Rarely (Monthly-Yearly), Never

21. How frequently do you use the internet?

Often, Sometimes, Rarely, Never

22. How frequently do other members of your household use a computer?

Often, Sometimes, Rarely, Never

23. How frequently do other members of your household use the internet?

Often, Sometimes, Rarely, Never

24. What would you or do you primarily use your computer for?

25. What would you or do you primarily use the internet for?

26. Does anyone in your household use the internet to work from home?

Yes, No

27. In the past six months have you used the internet to -

i) Search for travel related information?

ii) Searched for health or medical information?

iii) Purchased products or services (online shopping)?

iv) Sold products or services?

v) Visited a news website?

vi) Visited a government website?

vii) Researched school work?

viii) Performed a financial transaction?

ix) Communicated with co-workers, managers, or teachers?

x) Communicated with long-distance family?

xi) Searched for a job?

xii) Downloaded music?

xiii) Downloaded or watched a video online?

xiv) Used a social networking site such as Facebook or Twitter?

28. Did you receive computer training in school?

Yes, No

29. When did you last receive any instruction on using computers?

Never, Within the Past Year, Within the Past Five Years, More than Five Years Ago

30. Do you perceive that computer skills are valuable for a career?

Yes, No

31. How would you grade your personal computer skills?

Excellent, Good, Fair, Poor, None

32. If you had the opportunity, would you take a class to improve your computer skills?

Yes, No

33. Have you evver taken an online educational or job-training course?

Yes, No

34. Does anyone in your household use the internet to complete school assignments or job training coursework?

Often, Sometimes, Rarely, Never

35. If you had the opportunity to pursue continued education for or towards a career through online learning, would you be interested?

Yes, No

36. Do you subscribe to a paid TV service?

Cable TV, Satellite, No

i) How much are you currently paying for your TV service?

Under $20, $20-$40, $41-60, $61-$80, More than $80

37. Do you have a mobile phone?

Yes, No

i) How much are you currently paying for your mobile phone service?

Under $20, $20-$40, $41-$61, $61-$80, More than $80

ii) Do you have access to the internet from your mobile phone?

Yes, No

38. What changes or improvements to communication technology in your community would best meet your needs?