My home WiFi is running at 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. If new frequencies are added we will need to buy new SmartPhones, iPads, and new wireless routers. Ideally, the new (faster) frequencies will attract new technology users and allow the legacy systems to operate in a less cluttered space at the old frequencies.
I had the same question.
The way this FCC is attempting to solve the problem is to grab spectrum from TV broadcasters, for purposes like this or to expand cellular service. Genachowski wants to take over 100 MHz of spectrum away from broadcasters, i.e. everything above Channel 31. It's not clear how that will pan out, because theoretically it would be "voluntary."
That approach would impact TV big time, if you're one who uses over the air signals (as I do). Internet distribution of TV would help, perhaps, unless the networks suddenly stop providing content over the Internet. I would object if the FCC "forced" me into a subscription scheme, with this sort of spectrum-grab solution. A cynic would say that's what the FCC is trying to do.
Replay available now: A handful of emerging network technologies are competing to be the preferred wide-area connection for the Internet of Things. All claim lower costs and power use than cellular but none have wide deployment yet. Listen in as proponents of leading contenders make their case to be the metro or national IoT network of the future. Rick Merritt, EE Times Silicon Valley Bureau Chief, moderators this discussion. Join in and ask his guests questions.