Sam,
My guess is these areas will be sold off to the smaller regional
companies with less overhead or they will muscle the states into footing
the bill. As someone once said No one wants to be in office when the
copper networks go dark.
Regards,
Dawn DiPietro
Sam Tetherow wrote:
I don't
- Original Message -
From: Sam Tetherow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2007 7:50 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013
I don't deny any of that, but I'd be pretty pissed as a telco customer
if they are allowed
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 8:34 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013
Sam,
My guess is these areas will be sold off to the smaller regional companies
with less overhead or they will muscle the states into footing the bill.
As someone once said No one wants to be in office when
, 2007 10:40 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013
Thats Funny.
Like A inplace copper plant is more costly to maintain than a new Fiber
network? Not likely.
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
- Original Message
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 10:40 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013
Thats Funny.
Like A inplace copper plant is more costly to maintain than a new Fiber
network? Not likely.
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL
-
From: chris cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 9:40 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013
I was at a meeting yesterday that had several large carriers present.
One of the carriers made the comment
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 9:40 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Copper landlines gone by 2013
I was at a meeting yesterday that had several large carriers present.
One of the carriers made the comment that they are migrating away from
Hmm, I'll take that bet. People that make these types of claims
obviously haven't been in areas where you can go for more than 40 miles
with no cell service, on a major highway, not to mention getting off the
beaten path to individuals homes. Some times it really is more
economical to string
Sam,
It's the rural areas that are affected when it comes to the copper
network. As I understand it, the original purpose of the USF was to
help pay for the rural areas, otherwise there would be no copper there
to begin with. If the urban areas are losing landlines by the droves
there is no
I don't deny any of that, but I'd be pretty pissed as a telco customer
if they are allowed to pull out of those areas. A very large amount of
money has been funneled through the USF program so that voice lines are
available in the hinterlands.
How many millions of USF dollars has Verizon
Sam,
I thought it was an outrageous statement to be made myself. Figured it
might be good for list discussion.
George
Sam Tetherow wrote:
Hmm, I'll take that bet. People that make these types of claims
obviously haven't been in areas where you can go for more than 40 miles
with no cell
Quite honestly, if that article is a sampling of Evslin's grasp of
networking, he is damned lucky he was a co-founder of ATT and ITXC
because his thought process is so short sighted it is scary.
For those that haven't read the short article he is saying that since
landline phones have dropped
Sam Tetherow wrote:
Sam Tetherow wrote:
Hmm, I'll take that bet. People that make these types of claims
obviously haven't been in areas where you can go for more than 40
miles with no cell service, on a major highway, not to mention
getting off the beaten path to individuals homes. Some
13 matches
Mail list logo
