On Tue, Jun 18, 2002 at 02:51:24PM -0700, Daniel Curry wrote:
> [...]
> You all should read the Article about Jim Mehan in the Guardian, and
> then follow up on some of the comments in it about the ComCast AT&T
> broadband merger.
>
> Then look into how that effects the effective monopoly that the city of
> San Francisco gave AT&T for broadband sales and access. The same
> contract shows the build out rate for broadband, as well as a minimum
> level of service which is to change at different stages in the build
> out.
I belive Annalee Newitz has an agenda that she tried to leverage
with wireless. As one who is mentioned in this article I really
didn't want to see it be a wireless vs. AT&T or City of SF issue.
If Annalee had an issue with these folks she could have dug up a
bunch of dirt on them or try to cover wireless without making it a
wireless vs. cable issue.
Wireless can live side-by-side with other providers. If the cable
company can't compete then so be it. Cable providers will end up
being dinosaurs of the industry. Already satellite deliver video
is putting a big dent into the cable industry. Wireless and other
broadband providers will do the same thing for cable delivered
Internet bandwidth.
You can't regulate good service, you need to compete.
You can see the article at:
http://www.sfbg.com/36/37/cover_wireless.html
Tim
--
Snail: Tim Pozar / LNS / 1978 45th Ave / San Francisco CA 94116 / USA
POTS: +1 415 665 3790 Radio: KC6GNJ / KAE6247
"It's a damn poor mind that can only think of one way to spell a word."
- Andrew Jackson
"What is wanted is not the will to believe, but the will to find out,
which is the exact opposite." - Bertrand Russell, "Skeptical_Essays"
--
general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/>
[un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
