Alan Levy wrote: > visit the Intel Press Room at: > http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20021205corp.htm > [...] > AT&T plans to provide network infrastructure and > management. IBM plans to provide wireless site > installations and back-office systems.
It seems the owners are trying hard from the beginning to make the operation of this company as expensive as possible. IBM will benefit if every installation takes two hours instead of one. AT&T will benefit if there is a per-megabyte charge on traffic, and unstable equipment with a huge need for network management. It's not like a small operator that hangs a zero-maintenance commodity access point off of an affordable residential DSL line, but more like a replay of MobileStar/Starbucks. The burn rate is there, as if this was 1999, but how much have they got to burn? Is this perhaps a sign that AT&T and IBM really don't have anything better to do? It seems like a stupid project, but perhaps it was the least bad they could come up with? During the time Cometa burns its venture capital, both AT&T and IBM Global Services can show an increased demand for their services, perhaps at a very high prices, which isn't too bad these days. Only the VC firms lose. -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik Teknikringen 1e, SE-583 30 Linuxk�ping, Sweden tel +46-70-7891609 http://aronsson.se/ http://elektrosmog.nu/ http://susning.nu/ -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
